{"history":[{"id":"7197f255-26b5-4e7c-af93-69c343d8a49d","wordChanged":"vehicle.","newWord":":::summary\n**Location:** [LEO](https://bliptext.com/articles/low-earth-orbit) \n**Inclination:** 28.5° \n**Kilos:** FT**: 22800 kg when expended, 17500 kg when landing on [drone ship](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) · v1.1**: 13100 kg · v1.0**: 10400 kg \n:::\n\n# \n**Falcon 9** is a [partially reusable](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-system), [human-rated](https://bliptext.com/articles/human-rating-certification), [two-stage-to-orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit), [medium-lift launch vehicle](https://bliptext.com/articles/medium-lift-launch-vehicle) designed and manufactured in the United States by [SpaceX](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex).\nThe first Falcon 9 launch was on 4 June 2010, and the first commercial resupply mission to the [International Space Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/international-space-station) (ISS) launched on 8 October 2012.\nIn 2020, it became the first commercial rocket to launch humans to orbit.\nThe Falcon 9 has an exceptional safety record, with successful launches, two in-flight failures, one partial failure and one pre-flight destruction.\nIt is the most-launched American orbital rocket in history.\nThe rocket has [two stages](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit).\nThe first (booster) stage carries the second stage and payload to a predetermined speed and altitude, after which the second stage accelerates the payload to its target orbit.\nThe [booster](https://bliptext.com/articles/booster-rocketry) is capable of [landing vertically](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing) to facilitate reuse.\nThis feat was first achieved on [flight 20](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-flight-20) in December 2015.\nAs of, SpaceX has successfully landed Falcon 9 boosters times.\nIndividual boosters have flown as many as flights.\nBoth stages are powered by [SpaceX Merlin](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) engines, using cryogenic [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and rocket-grade [kerosene](https://bliptext.com/articles/kerosene) ([RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1)) as propellants.\nThe heaviest payloads flown to [geostationary transfer orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-transfer-orbit) (GTO) were [Intelsat 35e](https://bliptext.com/articles/intelsat-35e) carrying 6761 kg, and [Telstar 19V](https://bliptext.com/articles/telstar-19v) with 7075 kg. The former was launched into an advantageous [super-synchronous transfer orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-transfer-orbit), while the latter went into a lower-energy GTO, with an apogee well below the geostationary altitude.\nOn 24 January 2021, Falcon 9 [set a record](https://bliptext.com/articles/transporter-1-spaceflight) for the most satellites launched by a single rocket, carrying [143](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-spaceflight-launches-in-january-june-2021) into orbit.\nFalcon 9 is [human-rated](https://bliptext.com/articles/human-rating-certification) for transporting [NASA astronauts](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa-astronaut-corps) to the ISS, certified for the [National Security Space Launch](https://bliptext.com/articles/national-security-space-launch) program and the [NASA Launch Services Program](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa-launch-services-program) lists it as a \"Category 3\" (Low Risk) launch vehicle allowing it to launch the agency's most expensive, important, and complex missions.\nSeveral versions of Falcon 9 have been built and flown: [v1.0](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-0) flew from 2010 to 2013, [v1.1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1) flew from 2013 to 2016, while [v1.2 Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) first launched in 2015, encompassing the [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5) variant, which has been in operation since May 2018.\n\n# Development history\n\n## Conception and funding\nIn October 2005, SpaceX announced plans to launch Falcon 9 in the first half of 2007.\nThe initial launch would not occur until 2010.\nSpaceX spent its own capital to develop and fly its previous launcher, [Falcon 1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-1), with no pre-arranged sales of launch services.\nSpaceX developed Falcon 9 with private capital as well, but did have pre-arranged commitments by [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa) to purchase several operational flights once specific capabilities were demonstrated.\nMilestone-specific payments were provided under the [Commercial Orbital Transportation Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-orbital-transportation-services) (COTS) program in 2006.\nThe NASA contract was structured as a [Space Act Agreement](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-act-agreement) (SAA) \"to develop and demonstrate commercial orbital transportation service\", including the purchase of three demonstration flights.\nThe overall contract award was US$278 million to provide three demonstration launches of Falcon 9 with the [SpaceX Dragon](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-dragon) cargo spacecraft.\nAdditional milestones were added later, raising the total contract value to US$396 million.\nIn 2008, SpaceX won a [Commercial Resupply Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-resupply-services) (CRS) contract in [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa)'s [Commercial Orbital Transportation Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-orbital-transportation-services) (COTS) program to deliver cargo to ISS using Falcon 9/Dragon.\nFunds would be disbursed only after the demonstration missions were successfully and thoroughly completed.\nThe contract totaled US$1.6 billion for a minimum of 12 missions to ferry supplies to and [from](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-logistics) the ISS.\nIn 2011, SpaceX estimated that Falcon 9 v1.0 development costs were approximately US$300 million.\nNASA estimated development costs of US$3.6 billion had a traditional [cost-plus contract](https://bliptext.com/articles/cost-plus-contract) approach been used.\nA 2011 NASA report \"estimated that it would have cost the agency about US$4 billion to develop a rocket like the Falcon 9 booster based upon NASA's traditional contracting processes\" while \"a more commercial development\" approach might have allowed the agency to pay only US$1.7 billion\".\nIn 2014, SpaceX released combined development costs for Falcon 9 and Dragon.\nNASA provided US$396 million, while SpaceX provided over US$450 million.\nCongressional testimony by SpaceX in 2017 suggested that the unusual NASA process of \"setting only a [high-level requirement](https://bliptext.com/articles/requirement) for cargo transport to the space station [while] leaving the details to industry\" had allowed SpaceX to complete the task at a substantially lower cost.\n\"According to NASA's own independently verified numbers, SpaceX's development costs of both the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets were estimated at approximately $390 million in total.\"\n\n## Development\nSpaceX originally intended to follow its [Falcon 1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-1) launch vehicle with an intermediate capacity vehicle, [Falcon 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-5).\nThe Falcon line of vehicles are named after the [Millennium Falcon](https://bliptext.com/articles/millennium-falcon), a fictional starship from the [Star Wars](https://bliptext.com/articles/star-wars) film series.\nIn 2005, SpaceX announced that it was instead proceeding with Falcon 9, a \"fully reusable heavy-lift launch vehicle\", and had already secured a government customer.\nFalcon 9 was described as capable of launching approximately 9500 kg to low Earth orbit and was projected to be priced at US$27 million per flight with a 3.7 m [payload fairing](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) and US$35 million with a 5.2 m fairing.\nSpaceX also announced a heavy version of Falcon 9 with a payload capacity of approximately 25000 kg. Falcon 9 was intended to support LEO and GTO missions, as well as crew and cargo missions to the ISS.\n\n## Testing\nThe original NASA COTS contract called for the first demonstration flight in September 2008, and the completion of all three demonstration missions by September 2009.\nIn February 2008, the date slipped into the first quarter of 2009.\nAccording to Musk, complexity and [Cape Canaveral](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral) regulatory requirements contributed to the delay.\nThe first multi-engine test (two engines firing simultaneously, connected to the first stage) was completed in January 2008.\nSuccessive tests led to a 178-second (mission length), nine engine test-fire in November 2008.\nIn October 2009, the first flight-ready all-engine test fire was at its [test facility in McGregor, Texas](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-rocket-development-and-test-facility).\nIn November, SpaceX conducted the initial second stage test firing, lasting forty seconds.\nIn January 2010, a 329-second (mission length) orbit-insertion firing of the second stage was conducted at McGregor.\nThe elements of the stack arrived at the launch site for integration at the beginning of February, 2010.\nThe flight stack went vertical at [Space Launch Complex 40](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-space-launch-complex-40), [Cape Canaveral](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-air-force-station), and in March, SpaceX performed a static fire test, where the first stage was fired without launch.\nThe test was aborted at T−2 due to a failure in the high-pressure helium pump.\nAll systems up to the abort performed as expected, and no additional issues needed addressing.\nA subsequent test on 13 March fired the first-stage engines for 3.5 seconds.\n\n## Production\nIn December 2010, the SpaceX production line manufactured a Falcon 9 (and Dragon spacecraft) every three months.\nBy September 2013, SpaceX's total manufacturing space had increased to nearly 93000 m2, in order to support a production capacity of 40 rocket cores annually.\nThe factory was producing one Falcon 9 per month.\nBy February 2016 the production rate for Falcon 9 cores had increased to 18 per year, and the number of first stage cores that could be assembled at one time reached six.\nSince 2018, SpaceX has routinely reused first stages, reducing the demand for new cores.\nIn 2023, SpaceX performed 91 launches of Falcon 9 with only 4 using new boosters and successfully recovered the booster on all flights.\nThe [Hawthorne factory](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex) continues to produce one (expendable) second stage for each launch.\n\n# Launch history\n\n## Notable flights and payloads\n# [Falcon 9 flight 20 historic first-stage landing at Cape Canaveral, Landing Zone 1, on 21 December 2015 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/ORBCOMM-2///First-Stage///Landing///%2823271687254%29.jpg]\n\n### Notable payloads\n\n# Design\nF9 is a [two-stage](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit), [LOX](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen)/[RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1)-powered giant phallus\n\n## Specifications\n\n## Engine\nBoth stages are equipped with [Merlin 1D](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) rocket engines.\nEvery Merlin engine produces 854 kN of thrust.\nThey use a [pyrophoric](https://bliptext.com/articles/pyrophoricity) mixture of [triethylaluminum](https://bliptext.com/articles/triethylaluminum)-[triethylborane](https://bliptext.com/articles/triethylborane) (TEA-TEB) as an engine igniter.\nThe booster stage has 9 engines, arranged in a configuration that SpaceX calls [Octaweb](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1).\nThe second stage of the Falcon 9 has 1 short or regular nozzle, [Merlin 1D Vacuum](https://bliptext.com/articles/merlin-1d-vacuum) engine version.\nFalcon 9 is capable of losing up to 2 engines and still complete the mission by burning the remaining engines longer.\nEach [Merlin rocket engine](https://bliptext.com/articles/merlin-rocket-engine-family) is controlled by three [voting](https://bliptext.com/articles/voting-logic) computers, each having 2 CPUs which constantly check the other 2 in the trio.\nThe Merlin 1D engines can [vector thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/thrust-vectoring) to adjust trajectory.\n\n## Tanks\nThe propellant tank walls and domes are made from an [aluminum–lithium alloy](https://bliptext.com/articles/aluminum-lithium-alloy).\nSpaceX uses an all [friction-stir welded](https://bliptext.com/articles/friction-stir-welding) tank, for its strength and reliability.\nThe second stage tank is a shorter version of the first stage tank.\nIt uses most of the same tooling, material, and manufacturing techniques.\nThe F9 interstage, which connects the upper and lower stages, is a carbon-fibre aluminium-core composite structure that holds reusable separation [collets](https://bliptext.com/articles/collet) and a pneumatic pusher system.\nThe original stage separation system had twelve attachment points, reduced to three for v1.1.\n\n## Fairing\nFalcon 9 uses a [payload fairing](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) (nose cone) to protect (non-Dragon) satellites during launch.\nThe fairing is 13 m long, 5.2 m in diameter, weighs approximately 1900 kg, and is constructed of carbon fiber skin overlaid on an aluminum honeycomb core.\nSpaceX designed and fabricates fairings in Hawthorne.\nTesting was completed at NASA's [Plum Brook Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/plum-brook-station) facility in spring 2013 where the acoustic shock and mechanical vibration of launch, plus [electromagnetic](https://bliptext.com/articles/electromagnetic-radiation) [static discharge](https://bliptext.com/articles/static-discharge) conditions, were simulated on a full-size test article in a [vacuum chamber](https://bliptext.com/articles/vacuum-chamber).\nSince 2019, fairings are designed to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere and are reused for future missions.\n# [Fairing F9 - sketch of payload space | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Fairing///F9.png]\n\n## Control systems\nSpaceX uses multiple redundant [flight computers](https://bliptext.com/articles/category-avionics-computers) in a [fault-tolerant design](https://bliptext.com/articles/fault-tolerant-design).\nThe software runs on [Linux](https://bliptext.com/articles/linux) and is written in [C++](https://bliptext.com/articles/c).\nFor flexibility, [commercial off-the-shelf](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-off-the-shelf) parts and system-wide radiation-tolerant design are used instead of [rad-hardened](https://bliptext.com/articles/radiation-hardening) parts.\nEach stage has stage-level flight computers, in addition to the Merlin-specific engine controllers, of the same fault-tolerant triad design to handle stage control functions.\nEach engine [microcontroller](https://bliptext.com/articles/microcontroller) CPU runs on a [PowerPC](https://bliptext.com/articles/powerpc) architecture.\n\n## Legs/fins\nBoosters that will be deliberately expended do not have legs or fins.\nRecoverable boosters include four extensible landing legs attached around the base.\nTo control the core's descent through the atmosphere, SpaceX uses [grid fins](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fins) that deploy from the vehicle moments after stage separation.\nInitially, the V1.2 Full Thrust version of the Falcon 9 were equipped with grid fins made from aluminum, which were eventually replaced by larger, more aerodynamically efficient, and durable titanium fins.\nThe upgraded titanium grid fins, cast and cut from a single piece of titanium, offer significantly better maneuverability and survivability from the extreme heat of re-entry than aluminum grid fins and can be reused indefinitely with minimal refurbishment.\n\n# Versions\nThe Falcon 9 has seen five major revisions: [v1.0](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-0), [v1.1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1), [Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) (also called Block 3 or v1.2), Block 4, and [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5).\nV1.0 flew five successful orbital launches from 2010 to 2013.\nThe much larger V1.1 made its first flight in September 2013.\nThe demonstration mission carried a small 500 kg primary payload, the [CASSIOPE](https://bliptext.com/articles/cassiope) satellite.\nLarger payloads followed, starting with the launch of the [SES-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-8) [GEO](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-orbit) [communications satellite](https://bliptext.com/articles/communications-satellite).\nBoth v1.0 and v1.1 used [expendable launch vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/expendable-launch-vehicle) (ELVs).\nThe [Falcon 9 Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) made its first flight in December 2015.\nThe first stage of the Full Thrust version was [reusable](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-vehicle).\nThe current version, known as [Falcon 9 Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5), made its first flight in May 2018.\n# [450px | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Falcon///9///version///comparison.png]\n\n## V1.0\nF9 v1.0 was an expendable launch vehicle developed from 2005 to 2010.\nIt flew for the first time in 2010.\nV1.0 made five flights, after which it was retired.\nThe first stage was powered by nine [Merlin 1C](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) engines arranged in a 3 × 3 grid.\nEach had a sea-level thrust of 556 kN for a total liftoff thrust of about 5000 kN.\nThe second stage was powered by a single [Merlin 1C engine modified for vacuum operation](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin), with an [expansion ratio](https://bliptext.com/articles/expansion-ratio) of 117:1 and a nominal burn time of 345 seconds.\nGaseous N2 thrusters were used on the second-stage as a [reaction control system](https://bliptext.com/articles/reaction-control-system) (RCS).\nEarly attempts to add a lightweight [thermal protection system](https://bliptext.com/articles/thermal-protection-system) to the booster stage and parachute recovery were not successful.\nIn 2011, SpaceX began a formal [development program](https://bliptext.com/articles/new-product-development) for a [reusable Falcon 9](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-reusable-launch-system-development-program), initially focusing on the first stage.\n# [A Falcon 9 v1.0 being launched with a Dragon spacecraft to deliver cargo to the ISS in 2012 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/SpX///CRS-2///launch///-///further///-///cropped.jpg]\n\n## V1.1\nV1.1 is 60% heavier with 60% more thrust than v1.0.\nIts nine (more powerful) Merlin 1D engines were rearranged into an \"octagonal\" pattern that SpaceX called Octaweb.\nThis is designed to simplify and streamline manufacturing.\nThe fuel tanks were 60% longer, making the rocket more susceptible to [bending](https://bliptext.com/articles/bending-moment) during flight.\nThe v1.1 first stage offered a total sea-level thrust at liftoff of 5885 kN, with the engines burning for a nominal 180 seconds.\nThe stage's thrust rose to 6672 kN as the booster climbed out of the atmosphere.\nThe stage separation system was redesigned to reduce the number of attachment points from twelve to three, and the vehicle had upgraded avionics and software.\nThese improvements increased the payload capability from 9000 kg to 13150 kg. SpaceX president [Gwynne Shotwell](https://bliptext.com/articles/gwynne-shotwell) stated the v1.1 had about 30% more payload capacity than published on its price list, with the extra margin reserved for [returning stages via powered re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-returnable-rocket).\nDevelopment testing of the first stage was completed in July 2013, and it first flew in September 2013.\nThe second stage igniter propellant lines were later insulated to better support in-space restart following long coast phases for orbital trajectory maneuvers.\nFour extensible carbon fiber/aluminum [honeycomb](https://bliptext.com/articles/honeycomb-structure) landing legs were included on later flights where landings were attempted.\nSpaceX pricing and payload specifications published for v1.1 included about 30% more performance than the published price list indicated; SpaceX reserved the additional performance to perform [reusability testing](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-first-stage-landing-tests).\nMany engineering changes to support reusability and recovery of the first stage were made for v1.1.\n# [Falcon 9 v1.0 (left) and v1.1 (right) engine configurations | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Falcon///9///v1.0///and///v1.1///engine.svg]\n# [The launch of the first Falcon 9 v1.1 from Vandenberg SLC-4 (Falcon 9 Flight 6) in September 2013 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Launch///of///Falcon///9///carrying///CASSIOPE///%28130929-F-ET475-012%29.jpg]\n\n## Full Thrust\nThe Full Thrust upgrade (also known as FT, v1.2 or Block 3), made major changes.\nIt added cryogenic propellant cooling to increase density allowing 17% higher thrust, improved the stage separation system, stretched the second stage to hold additional propellant, and strengthened struts for holding helium bottles believed to have been involved with the failure of flight 19.\nIt offered a [reusable first stage](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-vehicle).\nPlans to reuse the second-stage were abandoned as the weight of a heat shield and other equipment would reduce payload too much.\nThe reusable booster was developed using systems and software tested on the Falcon 9 prototypes.\nThe [Autonomous Flight Safety System](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-flight-safety-system) (AFSS) replaced the ground-based mission flight control personnel and equipment.\nAFSS offered on-board Positioning, Navigation and Timing sources and decision logic.\nThe benefits of AFSS included increased public safety, reduced reliance on range infrastructure, reduced range spacelift cost, increased schedule predictability and availability, operational flexibility, and launch slot flexibility\".\nFT's capacity allowed SpaceX to choose between increasing payload, decreasing launch price, or both.\nIts [first successful landing](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-flight-20) came in December 2015 and the [first reflight](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) in March 2017.\nIn February 2017, [CRS-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-10) launch was the first operational launch utilizing AFSS.\nAll SpaceX launches after 16 March used AFSS.\nA 25 June mission carried the second batch of ten [Iridium NEXT](https://bliptext.com/articles/iridium-satellite-constellation) satellites, for which the aluminum [grid fins](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fin) were replaced by larger [titanium](https://bliptext.com/articles/titanium) versions, to improve control authority, and heat tolerance during [re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/atmospheric-entry).\n# [A close-up of the newer titanium grid fins first flown for the second Iridium NEXT mission in June 2017 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Second-generation///titanium///grid///fins%2C///Iridium-2///Mission///%2835533873795%29.jpg]\n\n## Block 4\nIn 2017, SpaceX started including incremental changes to the Full Thrust, internally dubbed Block 4.\nInitially, only the second stage was modified to Block 4 standards, flying on top of a Block 3 first stage for three missions: [NROL-76](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-nro-launches) and [Inmarsat-5 F5](https://bliptext.com/articles/inmarsat) in May 2017, and [Intelsat 35e](https://bliptext.com/articles/intelsat-35e) in July 2017.\nBlock 4 was described as a transition between the Full Thrust v1.2 Block 3 and [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5).\nIt includes incremental engine thrust upgrades leading to Block 5.\nThe maiden flight of the full Block 4 design (first and second stages) was the [SpaceX CRS-12](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-12) mission on 14 August.\n\n## Block 5\nIn October 2016, Musk described Block 5 as coming with \"a lot of minor refinements that collectively are important, but uprated thrust and improved legs are the most significant\".\nIn January 2017, Musk added that Block 5 \"significantly improves performance and ease of reusability\".\nThe maiden flight took place on 11 May 2018, with the [Bangabandhu Satellite-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bangabandhu-satellite-1) satellite.\n\n# Capabilities\n\n## Performance\n\n## Reliability\nAs of, Falcon 9 had achieved out of full mission successes.\n[SpaceX CRS-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-1) succeeded in its primary mission, but left a secondary payload in a wrong orbit, while [SpaceX CRS-7](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-7) was destroyed in flight.\nIn addition, [AMOS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/amos-6) disintegrated on the launch pad during fueling for an engine test.\nBlock 5 has a success rate of (/).\nFor comparison, the industry benchmark [Soyuz series](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-rocket-family) has performed 1880 launches with a success rate of 95.1% (the latest [Soyuz-2](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-2)'s success rate is 94%), the Russian [Proton series](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-rocket-family) has performed 425 launches with [a success rate of 88.7%](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-proton-launches) (the latest [Proton-M](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-m)'s success rate is 90.1%), the European [Ariane 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/ariane-5) has performed 117 launches with a success rate of 95.7%, and Chinese [Long March 3B](https://bliptext.com/articles/long-march-3b) has performed 85 launches with a success rate of 95.3%.\nF9's launch sequence includes a hold-down feature that allows full engine ignition and systems check before liftoff.\nAfter the first-stage engine starts, the launcher is held down and not released for flight until all propulsion and vehicle systems are confirmed to be operating normally.\nSimilar hold-down systems have been used on launch vehicles such as [Saturn V](https://bliptext.com/articles/saturn-v) and [Space Shuttle](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-shuttle).\nAn automatic safe shut-down and unloading of propellant occur if any abnormal conditions are detected.\nPrior to the launch date, [SpaceX](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex) sometimes completes a test cycle, culminating in a three-and-a-half second first stage engine static firing.\nF9 has [triple-redundant](https://bliptext.com/articles/triple-modular-redundancy) flight computers and [inertial navigation](https://bliptext.com/articles/inertial-navigation-system), with a [GPS](https://bliptext.com/articles/global-positioning-system) overlay for additional accuracy.\n\n## Engine-out capability\nLike the [Saturn](https://bliptext.com/articles/saturn-rocket-family) family of rockets, multiple engines allow for mission completion even if one fails.\nDetailed descriptions of destructive engine failure modes and designed-in engine-out capabilities were made public.\nSpaceX emphasized that the first stage is designed for \"engine-out\" capability.\n[CRS-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-1) in October 2012 was a partial success after engine number 1 lost pressure at 79 seconds, and then shut down.\nTo compensate for the resulting loss of acceleration, the first stage had to burn 28 seconds longer than planned, and the second stage had to burn an extra 15 seconds.\nThat extra burn time reduced fuel reserves so that the likelihood that there was sufficient fuel to execute the mission dropped from 99% to 95%.\nBecause NASA had purchased the launch and therefore contractually controlled several mission decision points, NASA declined SpaceX's request to restart the second stage and attempt to deliver the secondary payload into the correct orbit.\nAs a result, the secondary payload reentered the atmosphere.\nMerlin 1D engines have suffered two premature shutdowns on ascent.\nNeither has affected the primary mission, but both landing attempts failed.\nOn an 18 March 2020 Starlink mission, one of the first stage engines failed 3 seconds before cut-off due to the ignition of some [isopropyl alcohol](https://bliptext.com/articles/isopropyl-alcohol) that was not properly purged after cleaning.\nOn another Starlink mission on 15 February 2021, hot exhaust gasses entered an engine due to a fatigue-related hole in its cover.\nSpaceX stated the failed cover had the \"highest... number of flights that this particular boot [cover] design had seen.\"\n\n## Reusability\nSpaceX planned from the beginning to make both stages reusable.\nThe first stages of early Falcon flights were equipped with parachutes and were covered with a layer of [ablative](https://bliptext.com/articles/ablation) cork to allow them to survive [atmospheric re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/atmospheric-re-entry).\nThese were defeated by the accompanying aerodynamic stress and heating.\nThe stages were salt-water corrosion-resistant.\nIn late 2011, SpaceX eliminated parachutes in favor of [powered descent](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-reusable-launch-system-development-program).\nThe design was complete by February 2012.\nPowered landings were first flight-tested with the suborbital [Grasshopper rocket](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-prototypes).\nBetween 2012 and 2013, this low-altitude, low-speed demonstration test vehicle made eight [vertical landings](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing), including a 79-second round-trip flight to an altitude of 744 m. In March 2013, SpaceX announced that as of the first v1.1 flight, every booster would be equipped for powered descent.\n# [Explanatory graphic of Falcon 9's first stage barge landing | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Falcon///9///First///Stage///Reusability///Graphic.jpg]\n\n### Post-mission flight tests and landing attempts\nFor [Flight 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/cassiope) in September 2013, after stage separation, the [flight](https://bliptext.com/articles/flight-test) plan called for the first stage to conduct a burn to reduce its reentry velocity, and then a second burn just before reaching the water.\nAlthough not a complete success, the stage was able to change direction and make a controlled entry into the atmosphere.\nDuring the final landing burn, the RCS thrusters could not overcome an aerodynamically induced spin.\nThe centrifugal force deprived the engine of fuel, leading to early engine shutdown and a hard splashdown.\nAfter four more ocean landing tests, the [CRS-5](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-5) booster attempted a landing on the [ASDS](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) floating platform in January 2015.\nThe rocket incorporated (for the first time in an orbital mission) [grid fin](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fin) aerodynamic control surfaces, and successfully guided itself to the ship, before running out of hydraulic fluid and crashing into the platform.\nA second attempt occurred in April 2015, on [CRS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-6).\nAfter the launch, the [bipropellant](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-rocket-propellant) valve became stuck, preventing the control system from reacting rapidly enough for a successful landing.\nThe first attempt to land a booster on a ground pad near the launch site occurred on flight 20, in December 2015.\nThe landing was successful and the booster was recovered.\nThis was [the first time in history](https://bliptext.com/articles/timeline-of-rocket-and-missile-technology) that after launching an orbital mission, a first stage achieved a controlled [vertical landing](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing).\nThe first successful booster landing on an [ASDS](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) occurred in April 2016 on the drone ship [Of Course I Still Love You](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) during [CRS-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-8).\nSixteen test flights were conducted from 2013 to 2016, six of which achieved a soft landing and booster recovery.\nSince January 2017, with the exceptions of the centre core from the [Falcon Heavy test flight](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy-test-flight), [Falcon Heavy](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy) [USAF](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-air-force) [STP-2](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-test-program) mission, the [Falcon 9 CRS-16](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-16) resupply mission and the [Starlink](https://bliptext.com/articles/starlink)-4, 5, and 19 missions, every landing attempt has been successful.\nTwo boosters have been lost or destroyed at sea after landing: the center core used during the [Arabsat-6A](https://bliptext.com/articles/arabsat-6a) mission, and [B1058](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-b1058) after completing a Starlink flight.\n# [Falcon 9's first stage successfully landing on an ASDS for the first time, following the launch of SpaceX CRS-8 to the ISS | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/CRS-8///first///stage///landing///%2826366878046%29.jpg]\n\n### Relaunch\nThe first operational relaunch of a previously flown booster was accomplished in March 2017 with [B1021](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) on the [SES-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-10) mission after [CRS-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-8) in April 2016.\nAfter landing a second time, it was retired.\nIn June 2017, booster [B1029](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) helped carry [BulgariaSat-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bulgariasat-1) towards GTO after an [Iridium NEXT](https://bliptext.com/articles/iridium-satellite-constellation) LEO mission in January 2017, again achieving reuse and landing of a recovered booster.\nThe third reuse flight came in November 2018 on the [SSO-A](https://bliptext.com/articles/sherpa-space-tug) mission.\nThe core for the mission, [Falcon 9 B1046](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-b1046), was the first Block 5 booster produced, and had flown initially on the [Bangabandhu Satellite-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bangabandhu-satellite-1) mission.\nIn May 2021 the first booster reached 10 missions.\nMusk indicated that SpaceX intends to fly boosters until they see a failure in Starlink missions.\nAs of, the record is flights by the same booster.\n# [The first reflight of a Falcon 9, in March 2017 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/SES-10///Launch///-///world%27s///first///reflight///of///an///orbital///class///rocket///%2832915200224%29.jpg]\n\n### Recovery of fairings\nSpaceX developed [payload fairings](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) equipped with a steerable parachute as well as RCS thrusters that can be recovered and reused.\nA payload fairing half was recovered following a soft-landing in the ocean for the first time in March 2017, following [SES-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-10).\nSubsequently, [development began on a ship-based system](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-fairing-recovery-program) involving a massive net, in order to catch returning fairings.\nTwo dedicated ships were outfitted for this role, making their first catches in 2019.\nHowever, following mixed success, SpaceX returned to water landings and wet recovery.\n\n### Recovery of second stages\nDespite public statements that they would endeavor to make the second-stage reusable as well, by late 2014, SpaceX determined that the mass needed for a heat shield, landing engines, and other equipment to support recovery of the second stage was prohibitive, and abandoned second-stage reusability efforts.\n\n# Launch sites\nBy early 2018, F9 was regularly launching from three [orbital launch sites](https://bliptext.com/articles/spaceport): [Launch Complex 39A](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center-launch-complex-39a) of the [Kennedy Space Center](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center), [Space Launch Complex 4E](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-launch-complex-4e) of [Vandenberg Air Force Base](https://bliptext.com/articles/vandenberg-air-force-base), and [Space Launch Complex 40](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-space-launch-complex-40) at [Cape Canaveral Air Force Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-air-force-station).\nThe latter was damaged in the [AMOS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/amos-6) accident in September 2016, but was operational again by December 2017.\nOn April 21, 2023, the [United States Space Force](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-space-force), [Space Launch Delta 30](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-launch-delta-30) granted SpaceX permission to lease [Vandenberg Space Launch Complex 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/vandenberg-space-launch-complex-6) for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches.\nSLC-6 is likely to become the fourth launch site for Falcon 9.\n# [SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket delivered the ABS-3A and Eutelsat 115 West B satellites to a supersynchronous transfer orbit, launching from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida in March 2015 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Launch///of///Falcon///9///carrying///ABS-EUTELSAT///%2816510241270%29.jpg]\n\n# Pricing\nAt the time of Falcon 9's 2010 maiden flight, the price of a v1.0 launch was listed from US$49.9–56 million.\nThe list price increased thereafter, to US$54–59.5 million (2012).\nUS$56.5 million (v1.1, August 2013), US$61.2 million (June 2014), US$62 million (Full Thrust, May 2016), to US$ <30 million (2024).\n[Dragon](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-dragon) cargo missions to the ISS have an average cost of US$133 million under a fixed-price contract with [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa), including the cost of the spacecraft.\nThe 2013 [DSCOVR](https://bliptext.com/articles/deep-space-climate-observatory) mission, launched with Falcon 9 for [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration](https://bliptext.com/articles/national-oceanic-and-atmospheric-administration) (NOAA), cost US$97 million.\nIn 2004, [Elon Musk](https://bliptext.com/articles/elon-musk) stated, \"Ultimately, I believe 500 per pound (1100/kg) [of payload delivered to orbit] or less is very achievable\".\nAt its 2016 launch price with a full LEO payload, Full Thrust launch costs reached US1200 $/lb.\nIn 2011, Musk estimated that fuel and oxidizer for v1.0 cost about US$200,000.\nThe first stage uses 245620 L of [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and 146020 L of [RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1) fuel, while the second stage uses 28000 L of [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and 17000 L of [RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1).\nBy 2018, F9's decreased launch costs drew competitors.\n[Arianespace](https://bliptext.com/articles/arianespace) began working on [Ariane 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/ariane-6), [United Launch Alliance](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-launch-alliance) (ULA) on [Vulcan Centaur](https://bliptext.com/articles/vulcan-centaur), and [International Launch Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/international-launch-services) (ILS) on [Proton Medium](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-medium).\nOn 26 June 2019, Jonathan Hofeller (SpaceX vice president of commercial sales) said that price discounts given to early customers on mission with reused boosters had become the standard price.\nIn October 2019, Falcon 9's \"base price\" of US$62 million per launch was lowered to US$52 million for flights scheduled in 2021 and beyond.\nOn 10 April 2020, [Roscosmos](https://bliptext.com/articles/roscosmos) administrator [Dmitry Rogozin](https://bliptext.com/articles/dmitry-rogozin), said that his outfit was cutting prices by 30%, alleging that SpaceX was price dumping by charging commercial customers US$60 million per flight while charging NASA between 1.5 and 4 times as much for the same flight.\nMusk denied the claim and replied that the price difference reflected that the Falcon 9s were 80% reusable, while Russian rockets were single use.\nULA CEO [Tory Bruno](https://bliptext.com/articles/tory-bruno) stated \"Our estimate remains around 10 flights as a fleet average to achieve a consistent breakeven point ... and that no one has come anywhere close\".\nHowever, Elon Musk responded \"payload reduction due to reusability of booster and fairing is <40% for Falcon 9 and recovery and refurb is <10%, so you're roughly even with 2 flights, definitely ahead with 3\".\n[CNBC](https://bliptext.com/articles/cnbc) reported in April 2020 that the [United States Air Force](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-air-force)'s launches were costing US$95 million due to extra security.\nSpaceX executive Christopher Couluris stated that reusing rockets could bring prices even lower, that it \"costs 28 million to launch it, that's with everything\".\nIn 2024, it was stated that SpaceX's internal costs for launching a Falcon 9 were \"significantly less than $20 million\", achieved through the reuse rocket's first stage and payload fairings.\nHowever, this figure is difficult to verify.\n\n## Rideshare payload programs\nSpaceX provides two rideshare programs, regularly scheduled Falcon 9 flights for small satellite deployment: Transporter and Bandwagon.\nThe Transporter program started in 2021 and specializes in delivering payloads to sun-synchronous orbits, primarily serving Earth observation missions, with flights typically operating every four months.\nThe Bandwagon program started in 2024, offers access to mid-inclination orbits of approximately 45 degrees, with flights typically operating every six months.\nUnlike traditional secondary payload arrangements, these programs do not rely on a primary mission.\nInstead, SpaceX provides a unique \"cake topper\" option for larger satellites between 500 and 2500 kg.\nSpaceX also offers more traditional rideshares where small satellites piggyback on the launch of a large primary payload.\nIn the past, the company has offered clients the option to mount payloads using the [EELV Secondary Payload Adapter](https://bliptext.com/articles/eelv-secondary-payload-adapter) (ESPA) ring, the same [interstage adapter](https://bliptext.com/articles/multistage-rocket) first used for launching secondary payloads on [US DoD](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-department-of-defense) missions that use the [Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/evolved-expendable-launch-vehicle) (EELV) [Atlas V](https://bliptext.com/articles/atlas-v) and [Delta IV](https://bliptext.com/articles/delta-iv).\nEven though the Falcon 9 is a medium-lift launch vehicle, through these programs, SpaceX has become the leading provider of rideshare launches.\nGiven the company's frequent launch cadence and low prices, operators of [small-lift launch vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/small-lift-launch-vehicle) have found it difficult to compete.\n\n# Public display of Falcon 9 vehicles\nSpaceX first put a Falcon 9 ([B1019](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) on public display at their headquarters in [Hawthorne, California](https://bliptext.com/articles/hawthorne-california), in 2016.\nIn 2019, SpaceX donated a Falcon 9 (B1035) to [Space Center Houston](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-center-houston), in [Houston, Texas](https://bliptext.com/articles/houston-texas).\nIt was a booster that flew two missions, \"the 11th and 13th [supply missions](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-resupply-services) to the International Space Station [and was] the first Falcon 9 rocket NASA agreed to fly a second time\".\nIn 2021, SpaceX donated a Falcon Heavy side booster ([B1023](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) to the [Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center-visitor-complex).\nIn 2023, a Falcon 9 ([B1021](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) has been put on public display outside [Dish Network](https://bliptext.com/articles/dish-network)'s headquarters in [Littleton, Colorado](https://bliptext.com/articles/littleton-colorado).\n\n# Influence on space industry\nThe Russian space agency has launched the development of [Soyuz-7 (Amur)](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-7-rocket-family) which shares many similarities with Falcon 9, including a reusable first stage that will land vertically with the help of legs.\nThe first launch is planned for 2028-2030.\nChina's [Beijing Tianbing Technology](https://bliptext.com/articles/beijing-tianbing-technology) company is developing [Tianlong-3](https://bliptext.com/articles/tianlong-3), which is benchmarked against Falcon 9.\nIn 2024, China’s central government designated commercial space as a key industry for support, with the reusable medium-lift launchers being necessary to deploy China’s planned low Earth orbit [communications megaconstellations](https://bliptext.com/articles/satellite-internet-constellation).","wordIndex":1215,"createdAt":"2025-06-16T20:28:37.659Z","user":{"id":"Z7GSroM8eroedXol5PgnSJdzxytYUKnS","name":"Dadement","image":"https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a/ACg8ocJaRr3fy7fZFKbhVqtKBsm8dOm2517Sa3Z9sSAwh7AKuuu9YkQ=s96-c"}},{"id":"fee121dc-b358-43dc-bc43-e1e5373ecb18","wordChanged":"launch","newWord":":::summary\n**Location:** [LEO](https://bliptext.com/articles/low-earth-orbit) \n**Inclination:** 28.5° \n**Kilos:** FT**: 22800 kg when expended, 17500 kg when landing on [drone ship](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) · v1.1**: 13100 kg · v1.0**: 10400 kg \n:::\n\n# \n**Falcon 9** is a [partially reusable](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-system), [human-rated](https://bliptext.com/articles/human-rating-certification), [two-stage-to-orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit), [medium-lift launch vehicle](https://bliptext.com/articles/medium-lift-launch-vehicle) designed and manufactured in the United States by [SpaceX](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex).\nThe first Falcon 9 launch was on 4 June 2010, and the first commercial resupply mission to the [International Space Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/international-space-station) (ISS) launched on 8 October 2012.\nIn 2020, it became the first commercial rocket to launch humans to orbit.\nThe Falcon 9 has an exceptional safety record, with successful launches, two in-flight failures, one partial failure and one pre-flight destruction.\nIt is the most-launched American orbital rocket in history.\nThe rocket has [two stages](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit).\nThe first (booster) stage carries the second stage and payload to a predetermined speed and altitude, after which the second stage accelerates the payload to its target orbit.\nThe [booster](https://bliptext.com/articles/booster-rocketry) is capable of [landing vertically](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing) to facilitate reuse.\nThis feat was first achieved on [flight 20](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-flight-20) in December 2015.\nAs of, SpaceX has successfully landed Falcon 9 boosters times.\nIndividual boosters have flown as many as flights.\nBoth stages are powered by [SpaceX Merlin](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) engines, using cryogenic [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and rocket-grade [kerosene](https://bliptext.com/articles/kerosene) ([RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1)) as propellants.\nThe heaviest payloads flown to [geostationary transfer orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-transfer-orbit) (GTO) were [Intelsat 35e](https://bliptext.com/articles/intelsat-35e) carrying 6761 kg, and [Telstar 19V](https://bliptext.com/articles/telstar-19v) with 7075 kg. The former was launched into an advantageous [super-synchronous transfer orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-transfer-orbit), while the latter went into a lower-energy GTO, with an apogee well below the geostationary altitude.\nOn 24 January 2021, Falcon 9 [set a record](https://bliptext.com/articles/transporter-1-spaceflight) for the most satellites launched by a single rocket, carrying [143](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-spaceflight-launches-in-january-june-2021) into orbit.\nFalcon 9 is [human-rated](https://bliptext.com/articles/human-rating-certification) for transporting [NASA astronauts](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa-astronaut-corps) to the ISS, certified for the [National Security Space Launch](https://bliptext.com/articles/national-security-space-launch) program and the [NASA Launch Services Program](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa-launch-services-program) lists it as a \"Category 3\" (Low Risk) launch vehicle allowing it to launch the agency's most expensive, important, and complex missions.\nSeveral versions of Falcon 9 have been built and flown: [v1.0](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-0) flew from 2010 to 2013, [v1.1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1) flew from 2013 to 2016, while [v1.2 Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) first launched in 2015, encompassing the [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5) variant, which has been in operation since May 2018.\n\n# Development history\n\n## Conception and funding\nIn October 2005, SpaceX announced plans to launch Falcon 9 in the first half of 2007.\nThe initial launch would not occur until 2010.\nSpaceX spent its own capital to develop and fly its previous launcher, [Falcon 1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-1), with no pre-arranged sales of launch services.\nSpaceX developed Falcon 9 with private capital as well, but did have pre-arranged commitments by [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa) to purchase several operational flights once specific capabilities were demonstrated.\nMilestone-specific payments were provided under the [Commercial Orbital Transportation Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-orbital-transportation-services) (COTS) program in 2006.\nThe NASA contract was structured as a [Space Act Agreement](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-act-agreement) (SAA) \"to develop and demonstrate commercial orbital transportation service\", including the purchase of three demonstration flights.\nThe overall contract award was US$278 million to provide three demonstration launches of Falcon 9 with the [SpaceX Dragon](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-dragon) cargo spacecraft.\nAdditional milestones were added later, raising the total contract value to US$396 million.\nIn 2008, SpaceX won a [Commercial Resupply Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-resupply-services) (CRS) contract in [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa)'s [Commercial Orbital Transportation Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-orbital-transportation-services) (COTS) program to deliver cargo to ISS using Falcon 9/Dragon.\nFunds would be disbursed only after the demonstration missions were successfully and thoroughly completed.\nThe contract totaled US$1.6 billion for a minimum of 12 missions to ferry supplies to and [from](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-logistics) the ISS.\nIn 2011, SpaceX estimated that Falcon 9 v1.0 development costs were approximately US$300 million.\nNASA estimated development costs of US$3.6 billion had a traditional [cost-plus contract](https://bliptext.com/articles/cost-plus-contract) approach been used.\nA 2011 NASA report \"estimated that it would have cost the agency about US$4 billion to develop a rocket like the Falcon 9 booster based upon NASA's traditional contracting processes\" while \"a more commercial development\" approach might have allowed the agency to pay only US$1.7 billion\".\nIn 2014, SpaceX released combined development costs for Falcon 9 and Dragon.\nNASA provided US$396 million, while SpaceX provided over US$450 million.\nCongressional testimony by SpaceX in 2017 suggested that the unusual NASA process of \"setting only a [high-level requirement](https://bliptext.com/articles/requirement) for cargo transport to the space station [while] leaving the details to industry\" had allowed SpaceX to complete the task at a substantially lower cost.\n\"According to NASA's own independently verified numbers, SpaceX's development costs of both the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets were estimated at approximately $390 million in total.\"\n\n## Development\nSpaceX originally intended to follow its [Falcon 1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-1) launch vehicle with an intermediate capacity vehicle, [Falcon 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-5).\nThe Falcon line of vehicles are named after the [Millennium Falcon](https://bliptext.com/articles/millennium-falcon), a fictional starship from the [Star Wars](https://bliptext.com/articles/star-wars) film series.\nIn 2005, SpaceX announced that it was instead proceeding with Falcon 9, a \"fully reusable heavy-lift launch vehicle\", and had already secured a government customer.\nFalcon 9 was described as capable of launching approximately 9500 kg to low Earth orbit and was projected to be priced at US$27 million per flight with a 3.7 m [payload fairing](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) and US$35 million with a 5.2 m fairing.\nSpaceX also announced a heavy version of Falcon 9 with a payload capacity of approximately 25000 kg. Falcon 9 was intended to support LEO and GTO missions, as well as crew and cargo missions to the ISS.\n\n## Testing\nThe original NASA COTS contract called for the first demonstration flight in September 2008, and the completion of all three demonstration missions by September 2009.\nIn February 2008, the date slipped into the first quarter of 2009.\nAccording to Musk, complexity and [Cape Canaveral](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral) regulatory requirements contributed to the delay.\nThe first multi-engine test (two engines firing simultaneously, connected to the first stage) was completed in January 2008.\nSuccessive tests led to a 178-second (mission length), nine engine test-fire in November 2008.\nIn October 2009, the first flight-ready all-engine test fire was at its [test facility in McGregor, Texas](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-rocket-development-and-test-facility).\nIn November, SpaceX conducted the initial second stage test firing, lasting forty seconds.\nIn January 2010, a 329-second (mission length) orbit-insertion firing of the second stage was conducted at McGregor.\nThe elements of the stack arrived at the launch site for integration at the beginning of February, 2010.\nThe flight stack went vertical at [Space Launch Complex 40](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-space-launch-complex-40), [Cape Canaveral](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-air-force-station), and in March, SpaceX performed a static fire test, where the first stage was fired without launch.\nThe test was aborted at T−2 due to a failure in the high-pressure helium pump.\nAll systems up to the abort performed as expected, and no additional issues needed addressing.\nA subsequent test on 13 March fired the first-stage engines for 3.5 seconds.\n\n## Production\nIn December 2010, the SpaceX production line manufactured a Falcon 9 (and Dragon spacecraft) every three months.\nBy September 2013, SpaceX's total manufacturing space had increased to nearly 93000 m2, in order to support a production capacity of 40 rocket cores annually.\nThe factory was producing one Falcon 9 per month.\nBy February 2016 the production rate for Falcon 9 cores had increased to 18 per year, and the number of first stage cores that could be assembled at one time reached six.\nSince 2018, SpaceX has routinely reused first stages, reducing the demand for new cores.\nIn 2023, SpaceX performed 91 launches of Falcon 9 with only 4 using new boosters and successfully recovered the booster on all flights.\nThe [Hawthorne factory](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex) continues to produce one (expendable) second stage for each launch.\n\n# Launch history\n\n## Notable flights and payloads\n# [Falcon 9 flight 20 historic first-stage landing at Cape Canaveral, Landing Zone 1, on 21 December 2015 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/ORBCOMM-2///First-Stage///Landing///%2823271687254%29.jpg]\n\n### Notable payloads\n\n# Design\nF9 is a [two-stage](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit), [LOX](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen)/[RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1)-powered giant vehicle.\n\n## Specifications\n\n## Engine\nBoth stages are equipped with [Merlin 1D](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) rocket engines.\nEvery Merlin engine produces 854 kN of thrust.\nThey use a [pyrophoric](https://bliptext.com/articles/pyrophoricity) mixture of [triethylaluminum](https://bliptext.com/articles/triethylaluminum)-[triethylborane](https://bliptext.com/articles/triethylborane) (TEA-TEB) as an engine igniter.\nThe booster stage has 9 engines, arranged in a configuration that SpaceX calls [Octaweb](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1).\nThe second stage of the Falcon 9 has 1 short or regular nozzle, [Merlin 1D Vacuum](https://bliptext.com/articles/merlin-1d-vacuum) engine version.\nFalcon 9 is capable of losing up to 2 engines and still complete the mission by burning the remaining engines longer.\nEach [Merlin rocket engine](https://bliptext.com/articles/merlin-rocket-engine-family) is controlled by three [voting](https://bliptext.com/articles/voting-logic) computers, each having 2 CPUs which constantly check the other 2 in the trio.\nThe Merlin 1D engines can [vector thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/thrust-vectoring) to adjust trajectory.\n\n## Tanks\nThe propellant tank walls and domes are made from an [aluminum–lithium alloy](https://bliptext.com/articles/aluminum-lithium-alloy).\nSpaceX uses an all [friction-stir welded](https://bliptext.com/articles/friction-stir-welding) tank, for its strength and reliability.\nThe second stage tank is a shorter version of the first stage tank.\nIt uses most of the same tooling, material, and manufacturing techniques.\nThe F9 interstage, which connects the upper and lower stages, is a carbon-fibre aluminium-core composite structure that holds reusable separation [collets](https://bliptext.com/articles/collet) and a pneumatic pusher system.\nThe original stage separation system had twelve attachment points, reduced to three for v1.1.\n\n## Fairing\nFalcon 9 uses a [payload fairing](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) (nose cone) to protect (non-Dragon) satellites during launch.\nThe fairing is 13 m long, 5.2 m in diameter, weighs approximately 1900 kg, and is constructed of carbon fiber skin overlaid on an aluminum honeycomb core.\nSpaceX designed and fabricates fairings in Hawthorne.\nTesting was completed at NASA's [Plum Brook Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/plum-brook-station) facility in spring 2013 where the acoustic shock and mechanical vibration of launch, plus [electromagnetic](https://bliptext.com/articles/electromagnetic-radiation) [static discharge](https://bliptext.com/articles/static-discharge) conditions, were simulated on a full-size test article in a [vacuum chamber](https://bliptext.com/articles/vacuum-chamber).\nSince 2019, fairings are designed to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere and are reused for future missions.\n# [Fairing F9 - sketch of payload space | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Fairing///F9.png]\n\n## Control systems\nSpaceX uses multiple redundant [flight computers](https://bliptext.com/articles/category-avionics-computers) in a [fault-tolerant design](https://bliptext.com/articles/fault-tolerant-design).\nThe software runs on [Linux](https://bliptext.com/articles/linux) and is written in [C++](https://bliptext.com/articles/c).\nFor flexibility, [commercial off-the-shelf](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-off-the-shelf) parts and system-wide radiation-tolerant design are used instead of [rad-hardened](https://bliptext.com/articles/radiation-hardening) parts.\nEach stage has stage-level flight computers, in addition to the Merlin-specific engine controllers, of the same fault-tolerant triad design to handle stage control functions.\nEach engine [microcontroller](https://bliptext.com/articles/microcontroller) CPU runs on a [PowerPC](https://bliptext.com/articles/powerpc) architecture.\n\n## Legs/fins\nBoosters that will be deliberately expended do not have legs or fins.\nRecoverable boosters include four extensible landing legs attached around the base.\nTo control the core's descent through the atmosphere, SpaceX uses [grid fins](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fins) that deploy from the vehicle moments after stage separation.\nInitially, the V1.2 Full Thrust version of the Falcon 9 were equipped with grid fins made from aluminum, which were eventually replaced by larger, more aerodynamically efficient, and durable titanium fins.\nThe upgraded titanium grid fins, cast and cut from a single piece of titanium, offer significantly better maneuverability and survivability from the extreme heat of re-entry than aluminum grid fins and can be reused indefinitely with minimal refurbishment.\n\n# Versions\nThe Falcon 9 has seen five major revisions: [v1.0](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-0), [v1.1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1), [Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) (also called Block 3 or v1.2), Block 4, and [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5).\nV1.0 flew five successful orbital launches from 2010 to 2013.\nThe much larger V1.1 made its first flight in September 2013.\nThe demonstration mission carried a small 500 kg primary payload, the [CASSIOPE](https://bliptext.com/articles/cassiope) satellite.\nLarger payloads followed, starting with the launch of the [SES-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-8) [GEO](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-orbit) [communications satellite](https://bliptext.com/articles/communications-satellite).\nBoth v1.0 and v1.1 used [expendable launch vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/expendable-launch-vehicle) (ELVs).\nThe [Falcon 9 Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) made its first flight in December 2015.\nThe first stage of the Full Thrust version was [reusable](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-vehicle).\nThe current version, known as [Falcon 9 Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5), made its first flight in May 2018.\n# [450px | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Falcon///9///version///comparison.png]\n\n## V1.0\nF9 v1.0 was an expendable launch vehicle developed from 2005 to 2010.\nIt flew for the first time in 2010.\nV1.0 made five flights, after which it was retired.\nThe first stage was powered by nine [Merlin 1C](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) engines arranged in a 3 × 3 grid.\nEach had a sea-level thrust of 556 kN for a total liftoff thrust of about 5000 kN.\nThe second stage was powered by a single [Merlin 1C engine modified for vacuum operation](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin), with an [expansion ratio](https://bliptext.com/articles/expansion-ratio) of 117:1 and a nominal burn time of 345 seconds.\nGaseous N2 thrusters were used on the second-stage as a [reaction control system](https://bliptext.com/articles/reaction-control-system) (RCS).\nEarly attempts to add a lightweight [thermal protection system](https://bliptext.com/articles/thermal-protection-system) to the booster stage and parachute recovery were not successful.\nIn 2011, SpaceX began a formal [development program](https://bliptext.com/articles/new-product-development) for a [reusable Falcon 9](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-reusable-launch-system-development-program), initially focusing on the first stage.\n# [A Falcon 9 v1.0 being launched with a Dragon spacecraft to deliver cargo to the ISS in 2012 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/SpX///CRS-2///launch///-///further///-///cropped.jpg]\n\n## V1.1\nV1.1 is 60% heavier with 60% more thrust than v1.0.\nIts nine (more powerful) Merlin 1D engines were rearranged into an \"octagonal\" pattern that SpaceX called Octaweb.\nThis is designed to simplify and streamline manufacturing.\nThe fuel tanks were 60% longer, making the rocket more susceptible to [bending](https://bliptext.com/articles/bending-moment) during flight.\nThe v1.1 first stage offered a total sea-level thrust at liftoff of 5885 kN, with the engines burning for a nominal 180 seconds.\nThe stage's thrust rose to 6672 kN as the booster climbed out of the atmosphere.\nThe stage separation system was redesigned to reduce the number of attachment points from twelve to three, and the vehicle had upgraded avionics and software.\nThese improvements increased the payload capability from 9000 kg to 13150 kg. SpaceX president [Gwynne Shotwell](https://bliptext.com/articles/gwynne-shotwell) stated the v1.1 had about 30% more payload capacity than published on its price list, with the extra margin reserved for [returning stages via powered re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-returnable-rocket).\nDevelopment testing of the first stage was completed in July 2013, and it first flew in September 2013.\nThe second stage igniter propellant lines were later insulated to better support in-space restart following long coast phases for orbital trajectory maneuvers.\nFour extensible carbon fiber/aluminum [honeycomb](https://bliptext.com/articles/honeycomb-structure) landing legs were included on later flights where landings were attempted.\nSpaceX pricing and payload specifications published for v1.1 included about 30% more performance than the published price list indicated; SpaceX reserved the additional performance to perform [reusability testing](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-first-stage-landing-tests).\nMany engineering changes to support reusability and recovery of the first stage were made for v1.1.\n# [Falcon 9 v1.0 (left) and v1.1 (right) engine configurations | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Falcon///9///v1.0///and///v1.1///engine.svg]\n# [The launch of the first Falcon 9 v1.1 from Vandenberg SLC-4 (Falcon 9 Flight 6) in September 2013 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Launch///of///Falcon///9///carrying///CASSIOPE///%28130929-F-ET475-012%29.jpg]\n\n## Full Thrust\nThe Full Thrust upgrade (also known as FT, v1.2 or Block 3), made major changes.\nIt added cryogenic propellant cooling to increase density allowing 17% higher thrust, improved the stage separation system, stretched the second stage to hold additional propellant, and strengthened struts for holding helium bottles believed to have been involved with the failure of flight 19.\nIt offered a [reusable first stage](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-vehicle).\nPlans to reuse the second-stage were abandoned as the weight of a heat shield and other equipment would reduce payload too much.\nThe reusable booster was developed using systems and software tested on the Falcon 9 prototypes.\nThe [Autonomous Flight Safety System](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-flight-safety-system) (AFSS) replaced the ground-based mission flight control personnel and equipment.\nAFSS offered on-board Positioning, Navigation and Timing sources and decision logic.\nThe benefits of AFSS included increased public safety, reduced reliance on range infrastructure, reduced range spacelift cost, increased schedule predictability and availability, operational flexibility, and launch slot flexibility\".\nFT's capacity allowed SpaceX to choose between increasing payload, decreasing launch price, or both.\nIts [first successful landing](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-flight-20) came in December 2015 and the [first reflight](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) in March 2017.\nIn February 2017, [CRS-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-10) launch was the first operational launch utilizing AFSS.\nAll SpaceX launches after 16 March used AFSS.\nA 25 June mission carried the second batch of ten [Iridium NEXT](https://bliptext.com/articles/iridium-satellite-constellation) satellites, for which the aluminum [grid fins](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fin) were replaced by larger [titanium](https://bliptext.com/articles/titanium) versions, to improve control authority, and heat tolerance during [re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/atmospheric-entry).\n# [A close-up of the newer titanium grid fins first flown for the second Iridium NEXT mission in June 2017 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Second-generation///titanium///grid///fins%2C///Iridium-2///Mission///%2835533873795%29.jpg]\n\n## Block 4\nIn 2017, SpaceX started including incremental changes to the Full Thrust, internally dubbed Block 4.\nInitially, only the second stage was modified to Block 4 standards, flying on top of a Block 3 first stage for three missions: [NROL-76](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-nro-launches) and [Inmarsat-5 F5](https://bliptext.com/articles/inmarsat) in May 2017, and [Intelsat 35e](https://bliptext.com/articles/intelsat-35e) in July 2017.\nBlock 4 was described as a transition between the Full Thrust v1.2 Block 3 and [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5).\nIt includes incremental engine thrust upgrades leading to Block 5.\nThe maiden flight of the full Block 4 design (first and second stages) was the [SpaceX CRS-12](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-12) mission on 14 August.\n\n## Block 5\nIn October 2016, Musk described Block 5 as coming with \"a lot of minor refinements that collectively are important, but uprated thrust and improved legs are the most significant\".\nIn January 2017, Musk added that Block 5 \"significantly improves performance and ease of reusability\".\nThe maiden flight took place on 11 May 2018, with the [Bangabandhu Satellite-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bangabandhu-satellite-1) satellite.\n\n# Capabilities\n\n## Performance\n\n## Reliability\nAs of, Falcon 9 had achieved out of full mission successes.\n[SpaceX CRS-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-1) succeeded in its primary mission, but left a secondary payload in a wrong orbit, while [SpaceX CRS-7](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-7) was destroyed in flight.\nIn addition, [AMOS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/amos-6) disintegrated on the launch pad during fueling for an engine test.\nBlock 5 has a success rate of (/).\nFor comparison, the industry benchmark [Soyuz series](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-rocket-family) has performed 1880 launches with a success rate of 95.1% (the latest [Soyuz-2](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-2)'s success rate is 94%), the Russian [Proton series](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-rocket-family) has performed 425 launches with [a success rate of 88.7%](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-proton-launches) (the latest [Proton-M](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-m)'s success rate is 90.1%), the European [Ariane 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/ariane-5) has performed 117 launches with a success rate of 95.7%, and Chinese [Long March 3B](https://bliptext.com/articles/long-march-3b) has performed 85 launches with a success rate of 95.3%.\nF9's launch sequence includes a hold-down feature that allows full engine ignition and systems check before liftoff.\nAfter the first-stage engine starts, the launcher is held down and not released for flight until all propulsion and vehicle systems are confirmed to be operating normally.\nSimilar hold-down systems have been used on launch vehicles such as [Saturn V](https://bliptext.com/articles/saturn-v) and [Space Shuttle](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-shuttle).\nAn automatic safe shut-down and unloading of propellant occur if any abnormal conditions are detected.\nPrior to the launch date, [SpaceX](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex) sometimes completes a test cycle, culminating in a three-and-a-half second first stage engine static firing.\nF9 has [triple-redundant](https://bliptext.com/articles/triple-modular-redundancy) flight computers and [inertial navigation](https://bliptext.com/articles/inertial-navigation-system), with a [GPS](https://bliptext.com/articles/global-positioning-system) overlay for additional accuracy.\n\n## Engine-out capability\nLike the [Saturn](https://bliptext.com/articles/saturn-rocket-family) family of rockets, multiple engines allow for mission completion even if one fails.\nDetailed descriptions of destructive engine failure modes and designed-in engine-out capabilities were made public.\nSpaceX emphasized that the first stage is designed for \"engine-out\" capability.\n[CRS-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-1) in October 2012 was a partial success after engine number 1 lost pressure at 79 seconds, and then shut down.\nTo compensate for the resulting loss of acceleration, the first stage had to burn 28 seconds longer than planned, and the second stage had to burn an extra 15 seconds.\nThat extra burn time reduced fuel reserves so that the likelihood that there was sufficient fuel to execute the mission dropped from 99% to 95%.\nBecause NASA had purchased the launch and therefore contractually controlled several mission decision points, NASA declined SpaceX's request to restart the second stage and attempt to deliver the secondary payload into the correct orbit.\nAs a result, the secondary payload reentered the atmosphere.\nMerlin 1D engines have suffered two premature shutdowns on ascent.\nNeither has affected the primary mission, but both landing attempts failed.\nOn an 18 March 2020 Starlink mission, one of the first stage engines failed 3 seconds before cut-off due to the ignition of some [isopropyl alcohol](https://bliptext.com/articles/isopropyl-alcohol) that was not properly purged after cleaning.\nOn another Starlink mission on 15 February 2021, hot exhaust gasses entered an engine due to a fatigue-related hole in its cover.\nSpaceX stated the failed cover had the \"highest... number of flights that this particular boot [cover] design had seen.\"\n\n## Reusability\nSpaceX planned from the beginning to make both stages reusable.\nThe first stages of early Falcon flights were equipped with parachutes and were covered with a layer of [ablative](https://bliptext.com/articles/ablation) cork to allow them to survive [atmospheric re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/atmospheric-re-entry).\nThese were defeated by the accompanying aerodynamic stress and heating.\nThe stages were salt-water corrosion-resistant.\nIn late 2011, SpaceX eliminated parachutes in favor of [powered descent](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-reusable-launch-system-development-program).\nThe design was complete by February 2012.\nPowered landings were first flight-tested with the suborbital [Grasshopper rocket](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-prototypes).\nBetween 2012 and 2013, this low-altitude, low-speed demonstration test vehicle made eight [vertical landings](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing), including a 79-second round-trip flight to an altitude of 744 m. In March 2013, SpaceX announced that as of the first v1.1 flight, every booster would be equipped for powered descent.\n# [Explanatory graphic of Falcon 9's first stage barge landing | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Falcon///9///First///Stage///Reusability///Graphic.jpg]\n\n### Post-mission flight tests and landing attempts\nFor [Flight 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/cassiope) in September 2013, after stage separation, the [flight](https://bliptext.com/articles/flight-test) plan called for the first stage to conduct a burn to reduce its reentry velocity, and then a second burn just before reaching the water.\nAlthough not a complete success, the stage was able to change direction and make a controlled entry into the atmosphere.\nDuring the final landing burn, the RCS thrusters could not overcome an aerodynamically induced spin.\nThe centrifugal force deprived the engine of fuel, leading to early engine shutdown and a hard splashdown.\nAfter four more ocean landing tests, the [CRS-5](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-5) booster attempted a landing on the [ASDS](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) floating platform in January 2015.\nThe rocket incorporated (for the first time in an orbital mission) [grid fin](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fin) aerodynamic control surfaces, and successfully guided itself to the ship, before running out of hydraulic fluid and crashing into the platform.\nA second attempt occurred in April 2015, on [CRS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-6).\nAfter the launch, the [bipropellant](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-rocket-propellant) valve became stuck, preventing the control system from reacting rapidly enough for a successful landing.\nThe first attempt to land a booster on a ground pad near the launch site occurred on flight 20, in December 2015.\nThe landing was successful and the booster was recovered.\nThis was [the first time in history](https://bliptext.com/articles/timeline-of-rocket-and-missile-technology) that after launching an orbital mission, a first stage achieved a controlled [vertical landing](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing).\nThe first successful booster landing on an [ASDS](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) occurred in April 2016 on the drone ship [Of Course I Still Love You](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) during [CRS-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-8).\nSixteen test flights were conducted from 2013 to 2016, six of which achieved a soft landing and booster recovery.\nSince January 2017, with the exceptions of the centre core from the [Falcon Heavy test flight](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy-test-flight), [Falcon Heavy](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy) [USAF](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-air-force) [STP-2](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-test-program) mission, the [Falcon 9 CRS-16](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-16) resupply mission and the [Starlink](https://bliptext.com/articles/starlink)-4, 5, and 19 missions, every landing attempt has been successful.\nTwo boosters have been lost or destroyed at sea after landing: the center core used during the [Arabsat-6A](https://bliptext.com/articles/arabsat-6a) mission, and [B1058](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-b1058) after completing a Starlink flight.\n# [Falcon 9's first stage successfully landing on an ASDS for the first time, following the launch of SpaceX CRS-8 to the ISS | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/CRS-8///first///stage///landing///%2826366878046%29.jpg]\n\n### Relaunch\nThe first operational relaunch of a previously flown booster was accomplished in March 2017 with [B1021](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) on the [SES-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-10) mission after [CRS-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-8) in April 2016.\nAfter landing a second time, it was retired.\nIn June 2017, booster [B1029](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) helped carry [BulgariaSat-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bulgariasat-1) towards GTO after an [Iridium NEXT](https://bliptext.com/articles/iridium-satellite-constellation) LEO mission in January 2017, again achieving reuse and landing of a recovered booster.\nThe third reuse flight came in November 2018 on the [SSO-A](https://bliptext.com/articles/sherpa-space-tug) mission.\nThe core for the mission, [Falcon 9 B1046](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-b1046), was the first Block 5 booster produced, and had flown initially on the [Bangabandhu Satellite-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bangabandhu-satellite-1) mission.\nIn May 2021 the first booster reached 10 missions.\nMusk indicated that SpaceX intends to fly boosters until they see a failure in Starlink missions.\nAs of, the record is flights by the same booster.\n# [The first reflight of a Falcon 9, in March 2017 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/SES-10///Launch///-///world%27s///first///reflight///of///an///orbital///class///rocket///%2832915200224%29.jpg]\n\n### Recovery of fairings\nSpaceX developed [payload fairings](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) equipped with a steerable parachute as well as RCS thrusters that can be recovered and reused.\nA payload fairing half was recovered following a soft-landing in the ocean for the first time in March 2017, following [SES-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-10).\nSubsequently, [development began on a ship-based system](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-fairing-recovery-program) involving a massive net, in order to catch returning fairings.\nTwo dedicated ships were outfitted for this role, making their first catches in 2019.\nHowever, following mixed success, SpaceX returned to water landings and wet recovery.\n\n### Recovery of second stages\nDespite public statements that they would endeavor to make the second-stage reusable as well, by late 2014, SpaceX determined that the mass needed for a heat shield, landing engines, and other equipment to support recovery of the second stage was prohibitive, and abandoned second-stage reusability efforts.\n\n# Launch sites\nBy early 2018, F9 was regularly launching from three [orbital launch sites](https://bliptext.com/articles/spaceport): [Launch Complex 39A](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center-launch-complex-39a) of the [Kennedy Space Center](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center), [Space Launch Complex 4E](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-launch-complex-4e) of [Vandenberg Air Force Base](https://bliptext.com/articles/vandenberg-air-force-base), and [Space Launch Complex 40](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-space-launch-complex-40) at [Cape Canaveral Air Force Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-air-force-station).\nThe latter was damaged in the [AMOS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/amos-6) accident in September 2016, but was operational again by December 2017.\nOn April 21, 2023, the [United States Space Force](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-space-force), [Space Launch Delta 30](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-launch-delta-30) granted SpaceX permission to lease [Vandenberg Space Launch Complex 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/vandenberg-space-launch-complex-6) for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches.\nSLC-6 is likely to become the fourth launch site for Falcon 9.\n# [SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket delivered the ABS-3A and Eutelsat 115 West B satellites to a supersynchronous transfer orbit, launching from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida in March 2015 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Launch///of///Falcon///9///carrying///ABS-EUTELSAT///%2816510241270%29.jpg]\n\n# Pricing\nAt the time of Falcon 9's 2010 maiden flight, the price of a v1.0 launch was listed from US$49.9–56 million.\nThe list price increased thereafter, to US$54–59.5 million (2012).\nUS$56.5 million (v1.1, August 2013), US$61.2 million (June 2014), US$62 million (Full Thrust, May 2016), to US$ <30 million (2024).\n[Dragon](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-dragon) cargo missions to the ISS have an average cost of US$133 million under a fixed-price contract with [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa), including the cost of the spacecraft.\nThe 2013 [DSCOVR](https://bliptext.com/articles/deep-space-climate-observatory) mission, launched with Falcon 9 for [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration](https://bliptext.com/articles/national-oceanic-and-atmospheric-administration) (NOAA), cost US$97 million.\nIn 2004, [Elon Musk](https://bliptext.com/articles/elon-musk) stated, \"Ultimately, I believe 500 per pound (1100/kg) [of payload delivered to orbit] or less is very achievable\".\nAt its 2016 launch price with a full LEO payload, Full Thrust launch costs reached US1200 $/lb.\nIn 2011, Musk estimated that fuel and oxidizer for v1.0 cost about US$200,000.\nThe first stage uses 245620 L of [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and 146020 L of [RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1) fuel, while the second stage uses 28000 L of [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and 17000 L of [RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1).\nBy 2018, F9's decreased launch costs drew competitors.\n[Arianespace](https://bliptext.com/articles/arianespace) began working on [Ariane 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/ariane-6), [United Launch Alliance](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-launch-alliance) (ULA) on [Vulcan Centaur](https://bliptext.com/articles/vulcan-centaur), and [International Launch Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/international-launch-services) (ILS) on [Proton Medium](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-medium).\nOn 26 June 2019, Jonathan Hofeller (SpaceX vice president of commercial sales) said that price discounts given to early customers on mission with reused boosters had become the standard price.\nIn October 2019, Falcon 9's \"base price\" of US$62 million per launch was lowered to US$52 million for flights scheduled in 2021 and beyond.\nOn 10 April 2020, [Roscosmos](https://bliptext.com/articles/roscosmos) administrator [Dmitry Rogozin](https://bliptext.com/articles/dmitry-rogozin), said that his outfit was cutting prices by 30%, alleging that SpaceX was price dumping by charging commercial customers US$60 million per flight while charging NASA between 1.5 and 4 times as much for the same flight.\nMusk denied the claim and replied that the price difference reflected that the Falcon 9s were 80% reusable, while Russian rockets were single use.\nULA CEO [Tory Bruno](https://bliptext.com/articles/tory-bruno) stated \"Our estimate remains around 10 flights as a fleet average to achieve a consistent breakeven point ... and that no one has come anywhere close\".\nHowever, Elon Musk responded \"payload reduction due to reusability of booster and fairing is <40% for Falcon 9 and recovery and refurb is <10%, so you're roughly even with 2 flights, definitely ahead with 3\".\n[CNBC](https://bliptext.com/articles/cnbc) reported in April 2020 that the [United States Air Force](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-air-force)'s launches were costing US$95 million due to extra security.\nSpaceX executive Christopher Couluris stated that reusing rockets could bring prices even lower, that it \"costs 28 million to launch it, that's with everything\".\nIn 2024, it was stated that SpaceX's internal costs for launching a Falcon 9 were \"significantly less than $20 million\", achieved through the reuse rocket's first stage and payload fairings.\nHowever, this figure is difficult to verify.\n\n## Rideshare payload programs\nSpaceX provides two rideshare programs, regularly scheduled Falcon 9 flights for small satellite deployment: Transporter and Bandwagon.\nThe Transporter program started in 2021 and specializes in delivering payloads to sun-synchronous orbits, primarily serving Earth observation missions, with flights typically operating every four months.\nThe Bandwagon program started in 2024, offers access to mid-inclination orbits of approximately 45 degrees, with flights typically operating every six months.\nUnlike traditional secondary payload arrangements, these programs do not rely on a primary mission.\nInstead, SpaceX provides a unique \"cake topper\" option for larger satellites between 500 and 2500 kg.\nSpaceX also offers more traditional rideshares where small satellites piggyback on the launch of a large primary payload.\nIn the past, the company has offered clients the option to mount payloads using the [EELV Secondary Payload Adapter](https://bliptext.com/articles/eelv-secondary-payload-adapter) (ESPA) ring, the same [interstage adapter](https://bliptext.com/articles/multistage-rocket) first used for launching secondary payloads on [US DoD](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-department-of-defense) missions that use the [Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/evolved-expendable-launch-vehicle) (EELV) [Atlas V](https://bliptext.com/articles/atlas-v) and [Delta IV](https://bliptext.com/articles/delta-iv).\nEven though the Falcon 9 is a medium-lift launch vehicle, through these programs, SpaceX has become the leading provider of rideshare launches.\nGiven the company's frequent launch cadence and low prices, operators of [small-lift launch vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/small-lift-launch-vehicle) have found it difficult to compete.\n\n# Public display of Falcon 9 vehicles\nSpaceX first put a Falcon 9 ([B1019](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) on public display at their headquarters in [Hawthorne, California](https://bliptext.com/articles/hawthorne-california), in 2016.\nIn 2019, SpaceX donated a Falcon 9 (B1035) to [Space Center Houston](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-center-houston), in [Houston, Texas](https://bliptext.com/articles/houston-texas).\nIt was a booster that flew two missions, \"the 11th and 13th [supply missions](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-resupply-services) to the International Space Station [and was] the first Falcon 9 rocket NASA agreed to fly a second time\".\nIn 2021, SpaceX donated a Falcon Heavy side booster ([B1023](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) to the [Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center-visitor-complex).\nIn 2023, a Falcon 9 ([B1021](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) has been put on public display outside [Dish Network](https://bliptext.com/articles/dish-network)'s headquarters in [Littleton, Colorado](https://bliptext.com/articles/littleton-colorado).\n\n# Influence on space industry\nThe Russian space agency has launched the development of [Soyuz-7 (Amur)](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-7-rocket-family) which shares many similarities with Falcon 9, including a reusable first stage that will land vertically with the help of legs.\nThe first launch is planned for 2028-2030.\nChina's [Beijing Tianbing Technology](https://bliptext.com/articles/beijing-tianbing-technology) company is developing [Tianlong-3](https://bliptext.com/articles/tianlong-3), which is benchmarked against Falcon 9.\nIn 2024, China’s central government designated commercial space as a key industry for support, with the reusable medium-lift launchers being necessary to deploy China’s planned low Earth orbit [communications megaconstellations](https://bliptext.com/articles/satellite-internet-constellation).","wordIndex":1214,"createdAt":"2025-06-16T20:28:03.232Z","user":{"id":"Z7GSroM8eroedXol5PgnSJdzxytYUKnS","name":"Dadement","image":"https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/a/ACg8ocJaRr3fy7fZFKbhVqtKBsm8dOm2517Sa3Z9sSAwh7AKuuu9YkQ=s96-c"}}],"article":{"id":"e4a2c5fc-f503-4589-ac00-11e5cfd92818","title":"Falcon 9","slug":"falcon-9","content":":::summary\n**Location:** [LEO](https://bliptext.com/articles/low-earth-orbit) \n**Inclination:** 28.5° \n**Kilos:** FT**: 22800 kg when expended, 17500 kg when landing on [drone ship](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) · v1.1**: 13100 kg · v1.0**: 10400 kg \n:::\n\n# \n**Falcon 9** is a [partially reusable](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-system), [human-rated](https://bliptext.com/articles/human-rating-certification), [two-stage-to-orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit), [medium-lift launch vehicle](https://bliptext.com/articles/medium-lift-launch-vehicle) designed and manufactured in the United States by [SpaceX](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex).\nThe first Falcon 9 launch was on 4 June 2010, and the first commercial resupply mission to the [International Space Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/international-space-station) (ISS) launched on 8 October 2012.\nIn 2020, it became the first commercial rocket to launch humans to orbit.\nThe Falcon 9 has an exceptional safety record, with successful launches, two in-flight failures, one partial failure and one pre-flight destruction.\nIt is the most-launched American orbital rocket in history.\nThe rocket has [two stages](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit).\nThe first (booster) stage carries the second stage and payload to a predetermined speed and altitude, after which the second stage accelerates the payload to its target orbit.\nThe [booster](https://bliptext.com/articles/booster-rocketry) is capable of [landing vertically](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing) to facilitate reuse.\nThis feat was first achieved on [flight 20](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-flight-20) in December 2015.\nAs of, SpaceX has successfully landed Falcon 9 boosters times.\nIndividual boosters have flown as many as flights.\nBoth stages are powered by [SpaceX Merlin](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) engines, using cryogenic [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and rocket-grade [kerosene](https://bliptext.com/articles/kerosene) ([RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1)) as propellants.\nThe heaviest payloads flown to [geostationary transfer orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-transfer-orbit) (GTO) were [Intelsat 35e](https://bliptext.com/articles/intelsat-35e) carrying 6761 kg, and [Telstar 19V](https://bliptext.com/articles/telstar-19v) with 7075 kg. The former was launched into an advantageous [super-synchronous transfer orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-transfer-orbit), while the latter went into a lower-energy GTO, with an apogee well below the geostationary altitude.\nOn 24 January 2021, Falcon 9 [set a record](https://bliptext.com/articles/transporter-1-spaceflight) for the most satellites launched by a single rocket, carrying [143](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-spaceflight-launches-in-january-june-2021) into orbit.\nFalcon 9 is [human-rated](https://bliptext.com/articles/human-rating-certification) for transporting [NASA astronauts](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa-astronaut-corps) to the ISS, certified for the [National Security Space Launch](https://bliptext.com/articles/national-security-space-launch) program and the [NASA Launch Services Program](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa-launch-services-program) lists it as a \"Category 3\" (Low Risk) launch vehicle allowing it to launch the agency's most expensive, important, and complex missions.\nSeveral versions of Falcon 9 have been built and flown: [v1.0](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-0) flew from 2010 to 2013, [v1.1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1) flew from 2013 to 2016, while [v1.2 Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) first launched in 2015, encompassing the [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5) variant, which has been in operation since May 2018.\n\n# Development history\n\n## Conception and funding\nIn October 2005, SpaceX announced plans to launch Falcon 9 in the first half of 2007.\nThe initial launch would not occur until 2010.\nSpaceX spent its own capital to develop and fly its previous launcher, [Falcon 1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-1), with no pre-arranged sales of launch services.\nSpaceX developed Falcon 9 with private capital as well, but did have pre-arranged commitments by [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa) to purchase several operational flights once specific capabilities were demonstrated.\nMilestone-specific payments were provided under the [Commercial Orbital Transportation Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-orbital-transportation-services) (COTS) program in 2006.\nThe NASA contract was structured as a [Space Act Agreement](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-act-agreement) (SAA) \"to develop and demonstrate commercial orbital transportation service\", including the purchase of three demonstration flights.\nThe overall contract award was US$278 million to provide three demonstration launches of Falcon 9 with the [SpaceX Dragon](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-dragon) cargo spacecraft.\nAdditional milestones were added later, raising the total contract value to US$396 million.\nIn 2008, SpaceX won a [Commercial Resupply Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-resupply-services) (CRS) contract in [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa)'s [Commercial Orbital Transportation Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-orbital-transportation-services) (COTS) program to deliver cargo to ISS using Falcon 9/Dragon.\nFunds would be disbursed only after the demonstration missions were successfully and thoroughly completed.\nThe contract totaled US$1.6 billion for a minimum of 12 missions to ferry supplies to and [from](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-logistics) the ISS.\nIn 2011, SpaceX estimated that Falcon 9 v1.0 development costs were approximately US$300 million.\nNASA estimated development costs of US$3.6 billion had a traditional [cost-plus contract](https://bliptext.com/articles/cost-plus-contract) approach been used.\nA 2011 NASA report \"estimated that it would have cost the agency about US$4 billion to develop a rocket like the Falcon 9 booster based upon NASA's traditional contracting processes\" while \"a more commercial development\" approach might have allowed the agency to pay only US$1.7 billion\".\nIn 2014, SpaceX released combined development costs for Falcon 9 and Dragon.\nNASA provided US$396 million, while SpaceX provided over US$450 million.\nCongressional testimony by SpaceX in 2017 suggested that the unusual NASA process of \"setting only a [high-level requirement](https://bliptext.com/articles/requirement) for cargo transport to the space station [while] leaving the details to industry\" had allowed SpaceX to complete the task at a substantially lower cost.\n\"According to NASA's own independently verified numbers, SpaceX's development costs of both the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets were estimated at approximately $390 million in total.\"\n\n## Development\nSpaceX originally intended to follow its [Falcon 1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-1) launch vehicle with an intermediate capacity vehicle, [Falcon 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-5).\nThe Falcon line of vehicles are named after the [Millennium Falcon](https://bliptext.com/articles/millennium-falcon), a fictional starship from the [Star Wars](https://bliptext.com/articles/star-wars) film series.\nIn 2005, SpaceX announced that it was instead proceeding with Falcon 9, a \"fully reusable heavy-lift launch vehicle\", and had already secured a government customer.\nFalcon 9 was described as capable of launching approximately 9500 kg to low Earth orbit and was projected to be priced at US$27 million per flight with a 3.7 m [payload fairing](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) and US$35 million with a 5.2 m fairing.\nSpaceX also announced a heavy version of Falcon 9 with a payload capacity of approximately 25000 kg. Falcon 9 was intended to support LEO and GTO missions, as well as crew and cargo missions to the ISS.\n\n## Testing\nThe original NASA COTS contract called for the first demonstration flight in September 2008, and the completion of all three demonstration missions by September 2009.\nIn February 2008, the date slipped into the first quarter of 2009.\nAccording to Musk, complexity and [Cape Canaveral](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral) regulatory requirements contributed to the delay.\nThe first multi-engine test (two engines firing simultaneously, connected to the first stage) was completed in January 2008.\nSuccessive tests led to a 178-second (mission length), nine engine test-fire in November 2008.\nIn October 2009, the first flight-ready all-engine test fire was at its [test facility in McGregor, Texas](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-rocket-development-and-test-facility).\nIn November, SpaceX conducted the initial second stage test firing, lasting forty seconds.\nIn January 2010, a 329-second (mission length) orbit-insertion firing of the second stage was conducted at McGregor.\nThe elements of the stack arrived at the launch site for integration at the beginning of February, 2010.\nThe flight stack went vertical at [Space Launch Complex 40](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-space-launch-complex-40), [Cape Canaveral](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-air-force-station), and in March, SpaceX performed a static fire test, where the first stage was fired without launch.\nThe test was aborted at T−2 due to a failure in the high-pressure helium pump.\nAll systems up to the abort performed as expected, and no additional issues needed addressing.\nA subsequent test on 13 March fired the first-stage engines for 3.5 seconds.\n\n## Production\nIn December 2010, the SpaceX production line manufactured a Falcon 9 (and Dragon spacecraft) every three months.\nBy September 2013, SpaceX's total manufacturing space had increased to nearly 93000 m2, in order to support a production capacity of 40 rocket cores annually.\nThe factory was producing one Falcon 9 per month.\nBy February 2016 the production rate for Falcon 9 cores had increased to 18 per year, and the number of first stage cores that could be assembled at one time reached six.\nSince 2018, SpaceX has routinely reused first stages, reducing the demand for new cores.\nIn 2023, SpaceX performed 91 launches of Falcon 9 with only 4 using new boosters and successfully recovered the booster on all flights.\nThe [Hawthorne factory](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex) continues to produce one (expendable) second stage for each launch.\n\n# Launch history\n\n## Notable flights and payloads\n# [Falcon 9 flight 20 historic first-stage landing at Cape Canaveral, Landing Zone 1, on 21 December 2015 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/ORBCOMM-2///First-Stage///Landing///%2823271687254%29.jpg]\n\n### Notable payloads\n\n# Design\nF9 is a [two-stage](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit), [LOX](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen)/[RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1)-powered giant phallus\n\n## Specifications\n\n## Engine\nBoth stages are equipped with [Merlin 1D](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) rocket engines.\nEvery Merlin engine produces 854 kN of thrust.\nThey use a [pyrophoric](https://bliptext.com/articles/pyrophoricity) mixture of [triethylaluminum](https://bliptext.com/articles/triethylaluminum)-[triethylborane](https://bliptext.com/articles/triethylborane) (TEA-TEB) as an engine igniter.\nThe booster stage has 9 engines, arranged in a configuration that SpaceX calls [Octaweb](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1).\nThe second stage of the Falcon 9 has 1 short or regular nozzle, [Merlin 1D Vacuum](https://bliptext.com/articles/merlin-1d-vacuum) engine version.\nFalcon 9 is capable of losing up to 2 engines and still complete the mission by burning the remaining engines longer.\nEach [Merlin rocket engine](https://bliptext.com/articles/merlin-rocket-engine-family) is controlled by three [voting](https://bliptext.com/articles/voting-logic) computers, each having 2 CPUs which constantly check the other 2 in the trio.\nThe Merlin 1D engines can [vector thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/thrust-vectoring) to adjust trajectory.\n\n## Tanks\nThe propellant tank walls and domes are made from an [aluminum–lithium alloy](https://bliptext.com/articles/aluminum-lithium-alloy).\nSpaceX uses an all [friction-stir welded](https://bliptext.com/articles/friction-stir-welding) tank, for its strength and reliability.\nThe second stage tank is a shorter version of the first stage tank.\nIt uses most of the same tooling, material, and manufacturing techniques.\nThe F9 interstage, which connects the upper and lower stages, is a carbon-fibre aluminium-core composite structure that holds reusable separation [collets](https://bliptext.com/articles/collet) and a pneumatic pusher system.\nThe original stage separation system had twelve attachment points, reduced to three for v1.1.\n\n## Fairing\nFalcon 9 uses a [payload fairing](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) (nose cone) to protect (non-Dragon) satellites during launch.\nThe fairing is 13 m long, 5.2 m in diameter, weighs approximately 1900 kg, and is constructed of carbon fiber skin overlaid on an aluminum honeycomb core.\nSpaceX designed and fabricates fairings in Hawthorne.\nTesting was completed at NASA's [Plum Brook Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/plum-brook-station) facility in spring 2013 where the acoustic shock and mechanical vibration of launch, plus [electromagnetic](https://bliptext.com/articles/electromagnetic-radiation) [static discharge](https://bliptext.com/articles/static-discharge) conditions, were simulated on a full-size test article in a [vacuum chamber](https://bliptext.com/articles/vacuum-chamber).\nSince 2019, fairings are designed to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere and are reused for future missions.\n# [Fairing F9 - sketch of payload space | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Fairing///F9.png]\n\n## Control systems\nSpaceX uses multiple redundant [flight computers](https://bliptext.com/articles/category-avionics-computers) in a [fault-tolerant design](https://bliptext.com/articles/fault-tolerant-design).\nThe software runs on [Linux](https://bliptext.com/articles/linux) and is written in [C++](https://bliptext.com/articles/c).\nFor flexibility, [commercial off-the-shelf](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-off-the-shelf) parts and system-wide radiation-tolerant design are used instead of [rad-hardened](https://bliptext.com/articles/radiation-hardening) parts.\nEach stage has stage-level flight computers, in addition to the Merlin-specific engine controllers, of the same fault-tolerant triad design to handle stage control functions.\nEach engine [microcontroller](https://bliptext.com/articles/microcontroller) CPU runs on a [PowerPC](https://bliptext.com/articles/powerpc) architecture.\n\n## Legs/fins\nBoosters that will be deliberately expended do not have legs or fins.\nRecoverable boosters include four extensible landing legs attached around the base.\nTo control the core's descent through the atmosphere, SpaceX uses [grid fins](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fins) that deploy from the vehicle moments after stage separation.\nInitially, the V1.2 Full Thrust version of the Falcon 9 were equipped with grid fins made from aluminum, which were eventually replaced by larger, more aerodynamically efficient, and durable titanium fins.\nThe upgraded titanium grid fins, cast and cut from a single piece of titanium, offer significantly better maneuverability and survivability from the extreme heat of re-entry than aluminum grid fins and can be reused indefinitely with minimal refurbishment.\n\n# Versions\nThe Falcon 9 has seen five major revisions: [v1.0](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-0), [v1.1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1), [Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) (also called Block 3 or v1.2), Block 4, and [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5).\nV1.0 flew five successful orbital launches from 2010 to 2013.\nThe much larger V1.1 made its first flight in September 2013.\nThe demonstration mission carried a small 500 kg primary payload, the [CASSIOPE](https://bliptext.com/articles/cassiope) satellite.\nLarger payloads followed, starting with the launch of the [SES-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-8) [GEO](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-orbit) [communications satellite](https://bliptext.com/articles/communications-satellite).\nBoth v1.0 and v1.1 used [expendable launch vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/expendable-launch-vehicle) (ELVs).\nThe [Falcon 9 Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) made its first flight in December 2015.\nThe first stage of the Full Thrust version was [reusable](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-vehicle).\nThe current version, known as [Falcon 9 Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5), made its first flight in May 2018.\n# [450px | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Falcon///9///version///comparison.png]\n\n## V1.0\nF9 v1.0 was an expendable launch vehicle developed from 2005 to 2010.\nIt flew for the first time in 2010.\nV1.0 made five flights, after which it was retired.\nThe first stage was powered by nine [Merlin 1C](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) engines arranged in a 3 × 3 grid.\nEach had a sea-level thrust of 556 kN for a total liftoff thrust of about 5000 kN.\nThe second stage was powered by a single [Merlin 1C engine modified for vacuum operation](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin), with an [expansion ratio](https://bliptext.com/articles/expansion-ratio) of 117:1 and a nominal burn time of 345 seconds.\nGaseous N2 thrusters were used on the second-stage as a [reaction control system](https://bliptext.com/articles/reaction-control-system) (RCS).\nEarly attempts to add a lightweight [thermal protection system](https://bliptext.com/articles/thermal-protection-system) to the booster stage and parachute recovery were not successful.\nIn 2011, SpaceX began a formal [development program](https://bliptext.com/articles/new-product-development) for a [reusable Falcon 9](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-reusable-launch-system-development-program), initially focusing on the first stage.\n# [A Falcon 9 v1.0 being launched with a Dragon spacecraft to deliver cargo to the ISS in 2012 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/SpX///CRS-2///launch///-///further///-///cropped.jpg]\n\n## V1.1\nV1.1 is 60% heavier with 60% more thrust than v1.0.\nIts nine (more powerful) Merlin 1D engines were rearranged into an \"octagonal\" pattern that SpaceX called Octaweb.\nThis is designed to simplify and streamline manufacturing.\nThe fuel tanks were 60% longer, making the rocket more susceptible to [bending](https://bliptext.com/articles/bending-moment) during flight.\nThe v1.1 first stage offered a total sea-level thrust at liftoff of 5885 kN, with the engines burning for a nominal 180 seconds.\nThe stage's thrust rose to 6672 kN as the booster climbed out of the atmosphere.\nThe stage separation system was redesigned to reduce the number of attachment points from twelve to three, and the vehicle had upgraded avionics and software.\nThese improvements increased the payload capability from 9000 kg to 13150 kg. SpaceX president [Gwynne Shotwell](https://bliptext.com/articles/gwynne-shotwell) stated the v1.1 had about 30% more payload capacity than published on its price list, with the extra margin reserved for [returning stages via powered re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-returnable-rocket).\nDevelopment testing of the first stage was completed in July 2013, and it first flew in September 2013.\nThe second stage igniter propellant lines were later insulated to better support in-space restart following long coast phases for orbital trajectory maneuvers.\nFour extensible carbon fiber/aluminum [honeycomb](https://bliptext.com/articles/honeycomb-structure) landing legs were included on later flights where landings were attempted.\nSpaceX pricing and payload specifications published for v1.1 included about 30% more performance than the published price list indicated; SpaceX reserved the additional performance to perform [reusability testing](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-first-stage-landing-tests).\nMany engineering changes to support reusability and recovery of the first stage were made for v1.1.\n# [Falcon 9 v1.0 (left) and v1.1 (right) engine configurations | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Falcon///9///v1.0///and///v1.1///engine.svg]\n# [The launch of the first Falcon 9 v1.1 from Vandenberg SLC-4 (Falcon 9 Flight 6) in September 2013 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Launch///of///Falcon///9///carrying///CASSIOPE///%28130929-F-ET475-012%29.jpg]\n\n## Full Thrust\nThe Full Thrust upgrade (also known as FT, v1.2 or Block 3), made major changes.\nIt added cryogenic propellant cooling to increase density allowing 17% higher thrust, improved the stage separation system, stretched the second stage to hold additional propellant, and strengthened struts for holding helium bottles believed to have been involved with the failure of flight 19.\nIt offered a [reusable first stage](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-vehicle).\nPlans to reuse the second-stage were abandoned as the weight of a heat shield and other equipment would reduce payload too much.\nThe reusable booster was developed using systems and software tested on the Falcon 9 prototypes.\nThe [Autonomous Flight Safety System](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-flight-safety-system) (AFSS) replaced the ground-based mission flight control personnel and equipment.\nAFSS offered on-board Positioning, Navigation and Timing sources and decision logic.\nThe benefits of AFSS included increased public safety, reduced reliance on range infrastructure, reduced range spacelift cost, increased schedule predictability and availability, operational flexibility, and launch slot flexibility\".\nFT's capacity allowed SpaceX to choose between increasing payload, decreasing launch price, or both.\nIts [first successful landing](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-flight-20) came in December 2015 and the [first reflight](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) in March 2017.\nIn February 2017, [CRS-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-10) launch was the first operational launch utilizing AFSS.\nAll SpaceX launches after 16 March used AFSS.\nA 25 June mission carried the second batch of ten [Iridium NEXT](https://bliptext.com/articles/iridium-satellite-constellation) satellites, for which the aluminum [grid fins](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fin) were replaced by larger [titanium](https://bliptext.com/articles/titanium) versions, to improve control authority, and heat tolerance during [re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/atmospheric-entry).\n# [A close-up of the newer titanium grid fins first flown for the second Iridium NEXT mission in June 2017 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Second-generation///titanium///grid///fins%2C///Iridium-2///Mission///%2835533873795%29.jpg]\n\n## Block 4\nIn 2017, SpaceX started including incremental changes to the Full Thrust, internally dubbed Block 4.\nInitially, only the second stage was modified to Block 4 standards, flying on top of a Block 3 first stage for three missions: [NROL-76](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-nro-launches) and [Inmarsat-5 F5](https://bliptext.com/articles/inmarsat) in May 2017, and [Intelsat 35e](https://bliptext.com/articles/intelsat-35e) in July 2017.\nBlock 4 was described as a transition between the Full Thrust v1.2 Block 3 and [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5).\nIt includes incremental engine thrust upgrades leading to Block 5.\nThe maiden flight of the full Block 4 design (first and second stages) was the [SpaceX CRS-12](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-12) mission on 14 August.\n\n## Block 5\nIn October 2016, Musk described Block 5 as coming with \"a lot of minor refinements that collectively are important, but uprated thrust and improved legs are the most significant\".\nIn January 2017, Musk added that Block 5 \"significantly improves performance and ease of reusability\".\nThe maiden flight took place on 11 May 2018, with the [Bangabandhu Satellite-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bangabandhu-satellite-1) satellite.\n\n# Capabilities\n\n## Performance\n\n## Reliability\nAs of, Falcon 9 had achieved out of full mission successes.\n[SpaceX CRS-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-1) succeeded in its primary mission, but left a secondary payload in a wrong orbit, while [SpaceX CRS-7](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-7) was destroyed in flight.\nIn addition, [AMOS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/amos-6) disintegrated on the launch pad during fueling for an engine test.\nBlock 5 has a success rate of (/).\nFor comparison, the industry benchmark [Soyuz series](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-rocket-family) has performed 1880 launches with a success rate of 95.1% (the latest [Soyuz-2](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-2)'s success rate is 94%), the Russian [Proton series](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-rocket-family) has performed 425 launches with [a success rate of 88.7%](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-proton-launches) (the latest [Proton-M](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-m)'s success rate is 90.1%), the European [Ariane 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/ariane-5) has performed 117 launches with a success rate of 95.7%, and Chinese [Long March 3B](https://bliptext.com/articles/long-march-3b) has performed 85 launches with a success rate of 95.3%.\nF9's launch sequence includes a hold-down feature that allows full engine ignition and systems check before liftoff.\nAfter the first-stage engine starts, the launcher is held down and not released for flight until all propulsion and vehicle systems are confirmed to be operating normally.\nSimilar hold-down systems have been used on launch vehicles such as [Saturn V](https://bliptext.com/articles/saturn-v) and [Space Shuttle](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-shuttle).\nAn automatic safe shut-down and unloading of propellant occur if any abnormal conditions are detected.\nPrior to the launch date, [SpaceX](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex) sometimes completes a test cycle, culminating in a three-and-a-half second first stage engine static firing.\nF9 has [triple-redundant](https://bliptext.com/articles/triple-modular-redundancy) flight computers and [inertial navigation](https://bliptext.com/articles/inertial-navigation-system), with a [GPS](https://bliptext.com/articles/global-positioning-system) overlay for additional accuracy.\n\n## Engine-out capability\nLike the [Saturn](https://bliptext.com/articles/saturn-rocket-family) family of rockets, multiple engines allow for mission completion even if one fails.\nDetailed descriptions of destructive engine failure modes and designed-in engine-out capabilities were made public.\nSpaceX emphasized that the first stage is designed for \"engine-out\" capability.\n[CRS-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-1) in October 2012 was a partial success after engine number 1 lost pressure at 79 seconds, and then shut down.\nTo compensate for the resulting loss of acceleration, the first stage had to burn 28 seconds longer than planned, and the second stage had to burn an extra 15 seconds.\nThat extra burn time reduced fuel reserves so that the likelihood that there was sufficient fuel to execute the mission dropped from 99% to 95%.\nBecause NASA had purchased the launch and therefore contractually controlled several mission decision points, NASA declined SpaceX's request to restart the second stage and attempt to deliver the secondary payload into the correct orbit.\nAs a result, the secondary payload reentered the atmosphere.\nMerlin 1D engines have suffered two premature shutdowns on ascent.\nNeither has affected the primary mission, but both landing attempts failed.\nOn an 18 March 2020 Starlink mission, one of the first stage engines failed 3 seconds before cut-off due to the ignition of some [isopropyl alcohol](https://bliptext.com/articles/isopropyl-alcohol) that was not properly purged after cleaning.\nOn another Starlink mission on 15 February 2021, hot exhaust gasses entered an engine due to a fatigue-related hole in its cover.\nSpaceX stated the failed cover had the \"highest... number of flights that this particular boot [cover] design had seen.\"\n\n## Reusability\nSpaceX planned from the beginning to make both stages reusable.\nThe first stages of early Falcon flights were equipped with parachutes and were covered with a layer of [ablative](https://bliptext.com/articles/ablation) cork to allow them to survive [atmospheric re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/atmospheric-re-entry).\nThese were defeated by the accompanying aerodynamic stress and heating.\nThe stages were salt-water corrosion-resistant.\nIn late 2011, SpaceX eliminated parachutes in favor of [powered descent](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-reusable-launch-system-development-program).\nThe design was complete by February 2012.\nPowered landings were first flight-tested with the suborbital [Grasshopper rocket](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-prototypes).\nBetween 2012 and 2013, this low-altitude, low-speed demonstration test vehicle made eight [vertical landings](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing), including a 79-second round-trip flight to an altitude of 744 m. In March 2013, SpaceX announced that as of the first v1.1 flight, every booster would be equipped for powered descent.\n# [Explanatory graphic of Falcon 9's first stage barge landing | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Falcon///9///First///Stage///Reusability///Graphic.jpg]\n\n### Post-mission flight tests and landing attempts\nFor [Flight 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/cassiope) in September 2013, after stage separation, the [flight](https://bliptext.com/articles/flight-test) plan called for the first stage to conduct a burn to reduce its reentry velocity, and then a second burn just before reaching the water.\nAlthough not a complete success, the stage was able to change direction and make a controlled entry into the atmosphere.\nDuring the final landing burn, the RCS thrusters could not overcome an aerodynamically induced spin.\nThe centrifugal force deprived the engine of fuel, leading to early engine shutdown and a hard splashdown.\nAfter four more ocean landing tests, the [CRS-5](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-5) booster attempted a landing on the [ASDS](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) floating platform in January 2015.\nThe rocket incorporated (for the first time in an orbital mission) [grid fin](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fin) aerodynamic control surfaces, and successfully guided itself to the ship, before running out of hydraulic fluid and crashing into the platform.\nA second attempt occurred in April 2015, on [CRS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-6).\nAfter the launch, the [bipropellant](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-rocket-propellant) valve became stuck, preventing the control system from reacting rapidly enough for a successful landing.\nThe first attempt to land a booster on a ground pad near the launch site occurred on flight 20, in December 2015.\nThe landing was successful and the booster was recovered.\nThis was [the first time in history](https://bliptext.com/articles/timeline-of-rocket-and-missile-technology) that after launching an orbital mission, a first stage achieved a controlled [vertical landing](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing).\nThe first successful booster landing on an [ASDS](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) occurred in April 2016 on the drone ship [Of Course I Still Love You](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) during [CRS-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-8).\nSixteen test flights were conducted from 2013 to 2016, six of which achieved a soft landing and booster recovery.\nSince January 2017, with the exceptions of the centre core from the [Falcon Heavy test flight](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy-test-flight), [Falcon Heavy](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy) [USAF](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-air-force) [STP-2](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-test-program) mission, the [Falcon 9 CRS-16](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-16) resupply mission and the [Starlink](https://bliptext.com/articles/starlink)-4, 5, and 19 missions, every landing attempt has been successful.\nTwo boosters have been lost or destroyed at sea after landing: the center core used during the [Arabsat-6A](https://bliptext.com/articles/arabsat-6a) mission, and [B1058](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-b1058) after completing a Starlink flight.\n# [Falcon 9's first stage successfully landing on an ASDS for the first time, following the launch of SpaceX CRS-8 to the ISS | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/CRS-8///first///stage///landing///%2826366878046%29.jpg]\n\n### Relaunch\nThe first operational relaunch of a previously flown booster was accomplished in March 2017 with [B1021](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) on the [SES-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-10) mission after [CRS-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-8) in April 2016.\nAfter landing a second time, it was retired.\nIn June 2017, booster [B1029](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) helped carry [BulgariaSat-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bulgariasat-1) towards GTO after an [Iridium NEXT](https://bliptext.com/articles/iridium-satellite-constellation) LEO mission in January 2017, again achieving reuse and landing of a recovered booster.\nThe third reuse flight came in November 2018 on the [SSO-A](https://bliptext.com/articles/sherpa-space-tug) mission.\nThe core for the mission, [Falcon 9 B1046](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-b1046), was the first Block 5 booster produced, and had flown initially on the [Bangabandhu Satellite-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bangabandhu-satellite-1) mission.\nIn May 2021 the first booster reached 10 missions.\nMusk indicated that SpaceX intends to fly boosters until they see a failure in Starlink missions.\nAs of, the record is flights by the same booster.\n# [The first reflight of a Falcon 9, in March 2017 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/SES-10///Launch///-///world%27s///first///reflight///of///an///orbital///class///rocket///%2832915200224%29.jpg]\n\n### Recovery of fairings\nSpaceX developed [payload fairings](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) equipped with a steerable parachute as well as RCS thrusters that can be recovered and reused.\nA payload fairing half was recovered following a soft-landing in the ocean for the first time in March 2017, following [SES-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-10).\nSubsequently, [development began on a ship-based system](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-fairing-recovery-program) involving a massive net, in order to catch returning fairings.\nTwo dedicated ships were outfitted for this role, making their first catches in 2019.\nHowever, following mixed success, SpaceX returned to water landings and wet recovery.\n\n### Recovery of second stages\nDespite public statements that they would endeavor to make the second-stage reusable as well, by late 2014, SpaceX determined that the mass needed for a heat shield, landing engines, and other equipment to support recovery of the second stage was prohibitive, and abandoned second-stage reusability efforts.\n\n# Launch sites\nBy early 2018, F9 was regularly launching from three [orbital launch sites](https://bliptext.com/articles/spaceport): [Launch Complex 39A](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center-launch-complex-39a) of the [Kennedy Space Center](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center), [Space Launch Complex 4E](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-launch-complex-4e) of [Vandenberg Air Force Base](https://bliptext.com/articles/vandenberg-air-force-base), and [Space Launch Complex 40](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-space-launch-complex-40) at [Cape Canaveral Air Force Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-air-force-station).\nThe latter was damaged in the [AMOS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/amos-6) accident in September 2016, but was operational again by December 2017.\nOn April 21, 2023, the [United States Space Force](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-space-force), [Space Launch Delta 30](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-launch-delta-30) granted SpaceX permission to lease [Vandenberg Space Launch Complex 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/vandenberg-space-launch-complex-6) for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches.\nSLC-6 is likely to become the fourth launch site for Falcon 9.\n# [SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket delivered the ABS-3A and Eutelsat 115 West B satellites to a supersynchronous transfer orbit, launching from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida in March 2015 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Launch///of///Falcon///9///carrying///ABS-EUTELSAT///%2816510241270%29.jpg]\n\n# Pricing\nAt the time of Falcon 9's 2010 maiden flight, the price of a v1.0 launch was listed from US$49.9–56 million.\nThe list price increased thereafter, to US$54–59.5 million (2012).\nUS$56.5 million (v1.1, August 2013), US$61.2 million (June 2014), US$62 million (Full Thrust, May 2016), to US$ <30 million (2024).\n[Dragon](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-dragon) cargo missions to the ISS have an average cost of US$133 million under a fixed-price contract with [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa), including the cost of the spacecraft.\nThe 2013 [DSCOVR](https://bliptext.com/articles/deep-space-climate-observatory) mission, launched with Falcon 9 for [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration](https://bliptext.com/articles/national-oceanic-and-atmospheric-administration) (NOAA), cost US$97 million.\nIn 2004, [Elon Musk](https://bliptext.com/articles/elon-musk) stated, \"Ultimately, I believe 500 per pound (1100/kg) [of payload delivered to orbit] or less is very achievable\".\nAt its 2016 launch price with a full LEO payload, Full Thrust launch costs reached US1200 $/lb.\nIn 2011, Musk estimated that fuel and oxidizer for v1.0 cost about US$200,000.\nThe first stage uses 245620 L of [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and 146020 L of [RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1) fuel, while the second stage uses 28000 L of [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and 17000 L of [RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1).\nBy 2018, F9's decreased launch costs drew competitors.\n[Arianespace](https://bliptext.com/articles/arianespace) began working on [Ariane 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/ariane-6), [United Launch Alliance](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-launch-alliance) (ULA) on [Vulcan Centaur](https://bliptext.com/articles/vulcan-centaur), and [International Launch Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/international-launch-services) (ILS) on [Proton Medium](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-medium).\nOn 26 June 2019, Jonathan Hofeller (SpaceX vice president of commercial sales) said that price discounts given to early customers on mission with reused boosters had become the standard price.\nIn October 2019, Falcon 9's \"base price\" of US$62 million per launch was lowered to US$52 million for flights scheduled in 2021 and beyond.\nOn 10 April 2020, [Roscosmos](https://bliptext.com/articles/roscosmos) administrator [Dmitry Rogozin](https://bliptext.com/articles/dmitry-rogozin), said that his outfit was cutting prices by 30%, alleging that SpaceX was price dumping by charging commercial customers US$60 million per flight while charging NASA between 1.5 and 4 times as much for the same flight.\nMusk denied the claim and replied that the price difference reflected that the Falcon 9s were 80% reusable, while Russian rockets were single use.\nULA CEO [Tory Bruno](https://bliptext.com/articles/tory-bruno) stated \"Our estimate remains around 10 flights as a fleet average to achieve a consistent breakeven point ... and that no one has come anywhere close\".\nHowever, Elon Musk responded \"payload reduction due to reusability of booster and fairing is <40% for Falcon 9 and recovery and refurb is <10%, so you're roughly even with 2 flights, definitely ahead with 3\".\n[CNBC](https://bliptext.com/articles/cnbc) reported in April 2020 that the [United States Air Force](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-air-force)'s launches were costing US$95 million due to extra security.\nSpaceX executive Christopher Couluris stated that reusing rockets could bring prices even lower, that it \"costs 28 million to launch it, that's with everything\".\nIn 2024, it was stated that SpaceX's internal costs for launching a Falcon 9 were \"significantly less than $20 million\", achieved through the reuse rocket's first stage and payload fairings.\nHowever, this figure is difficult to verify.\n\n## Rideshare payload programs\nSpaceX provides two rideshare programs, regularly scheduled Falcon 9 flights for small satellite deployment: Transporter and Bandwagon.\nThe Transporter program started in 2021 and specializes in delivering payloads to sun-synchronous orbits, primarily serving Earth observation missions, with flights typically operating every four months.\nThe Bandwagon program started in 2024, offers access to mid-inclination orbits of approximately 45 degrees, with flights typically operating every six months.\nUnlike traditional secondary payload arrangements, these programs do not rely on a primary mission.\nInstead, SpaceX provides a unique \"cake topper\" option for larger satellites between 500 and 2500 kg.\nSpaceX also offers more traditional rideshares where small satellites piggyback on the launch of a large primary payload.\nIn the past, the company has offered clients the option to mount payloads using the [EELV Secondary Payload Adapter](https://bliptext.com/articles/eelv-secondary-payload-adapter) (ESPA) ring, the same [interstage adapter](https://bliptext.com/articles/multistage-rocket) first used for launching secondary payloads on [US DoD](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-department-of-defense) missions that use the [Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/evolved-expendable-launch-vehicle) (EELV) [Atlas V](https://bliptext.com/articles/atlas-v) and [Delta IV](https://bliptext.com/articles/delta-iv).\nEven though the Falcon 9 is a medium-lift launch vehicle, through these programs, SpaceX has become the leading provider of rideshare launches.\nGiven the company's frequent launch cadence and low prices, operators of [small-lift launch vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/small-lift-launch-vehicle) have found it difficult to compete.\n\n# Public display of Falcon 9 vehicles\nSpaceX first put a Falcon 9 ([B1019](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) on public display at their headquarters in [Hawthorne, California](https://bliptext.com/articles/hawthorne-california), in 2016.\nIn 2019, SpaceX donated a Falcon 9 (B1035) to [Space Center Houston](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-center-houston), in [Houston, Texas](https://bliptext.com/articles/houston-texas).\nIt was a booster that flew two missions, \"the 11th and 13th [supply missions](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-resupply-services) to the International Space Station [and was] the first Falcon 9 rocket NASA agreed to fly a second time\".\nIn 2021, SpaceX donated a Falcon Heavy side booster ([B1023](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) to the [Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center-visitor-complex).\nIn 2023, a Falcon 9 ([B1021](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) has been put on public display outside [Dish Network](https://bliptext.com/articles/dish-network)'s headquarters in [Littleton, Colorado](https://bliptext.com/articles/littleton-colorado).\n\n# Influence on space industry\nThe Russian space agency has launched the development of [Soyuz-7 (Amur)](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-7-rocket-family) which shares many similarities with Falcon 9, including a reusable first stage that will land vertically with the help of legs.\nThe first launch is planned for 2028-2030.\nChina's [Beijing Tianbing Technology](https://bliptext.com/articles/beijing-tianbing-technology) company is developing [Tianlong-3](https://bliptext.com/articles/tianlong-3), which is benchmarked against Falcon 9.\nIn 2024, China’s central government designated commercial space as a key industry for support, with the reusable medium-lift launchers being necessary to deploy China’s planned low Earth orbit [communications megaconstellations](https://bliptext.com/articles/satellite-internet-constellation).","current_revision":"7197f255-26b5-4e7c-af93-69c343d8a49d","created_by":"kACnuQmH5k9Nr5VNVEpVeg7XpvUmMctD","created_at":"2025-01-25T22:18:58.385Z","updated_at":"2025-06-16T20:28:37.674Z","search_vector":"'9':2 'falcon':1","search_content":" \n**Location:** [LEO](https://bliptext.com/articles/low-earth-orbit) \n**Inclination:** 28.5° \n**Kilos:** FT**: 22800 kg when expended, 17500 kg when landing on [drone ship](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) · v1.1**: 13100 kg · v1.0**: 10400 kg \n \n\n# \n**Falcon 9** is a [partially reusable](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-system), [human-rated](https://bliptext.com/articles/human-rating-certification), [two-stage-to-orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit), [medium-lift launch vehicle](https://bliptext.com/articles/medium-lift-launch-vehicle) designed and manufactured in the United States by [SpaceX](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex).\nThe first Falcon 9 launch was on 4 June 2010, and the first commercial resupply mission to the [International Space Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/international-space-station) (ISS) launched on 8 October 2012.\nIn 2020, it became the first commercial rocket to launch humans to orbit.\nThe Falcon 9 has an exceptional safety record, with successful launches, two in-flight failures, one partial failure and one pre-flight destruction.\nIt is the most-launched American orbital rocket in history.\nThe rocket has [two stages](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit).\nThe first (booster) stage carries the second stage and payload to a predetermined speed and altitude, after which the second stage accelerates the payload to its target orbit.\nThe [booster](https://bliptext.com/articles/booster-rocketry) is capable of [landing vertically](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing) to facilitate reuse.\nThis feat was first achieved on [flight 20](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-flight-20) in December 2015.\nAs of, SpaceX has successfully landed Falcon 9 boosters times.\nIndividual boosters have flown as many as flights.\nBoth stages are powered by [SpaceX Merlin](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) engines, using cryogenic [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and rocket-grade [kerosene](https://bliptext.com/articles/kerosene) ([RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1)) as propellants.\nThe heaviest payloads flown to [geostationary transfer orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-transfer-orbit) (GTO) were [Intelsat 35e](https://bliptext.com/articles/intelsat-35e) carrying 6761 kg, and [Telstar 19V](https://bliptext.com/articles/telstar-19v) with 7075 kg. The former was launched into an advantageous [super-synchronous transfer orbit](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-transfer-orbit), while the latter went into a lower-energy GTO, with an apogee well below the geostationary altitude.\nOn 24 January 2021, Falcon 9 [set a record](https://bliptext.com/articles/transporter-1-spaceflight) for the most satellites launched by a single rocket, carrying [143](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-spaceflight-launches-in-january-june-2021) into orbit.\nFalcon 9 is [human-rated](https://bliptext.com/articles/human-rating-certification) for transporting [NASA astronauts](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa-astronaut-corps) to the ISS, certified for the [National Security Space Launch](https://bliptext.com/articles/national-security-space-launch) program and the [NASA Launch Services Program](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa-launch-services-program) lists it as a \"Category 3\" (Low Risk) launch vehicle allowing it to launch the agency's most expensive, important, and complex missions.\nSeveral versions of Falcon 9 have been built and flown: [v1.0](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-0) flew from 2010 to 2013, [v1.1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1) flew from 2013 to 2016, while [v1.2 Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) first launched in 2015, encompassing the [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5) variant, which has been in operation since May 2018.\n\n# Development history\n\n## Conception and funding\nIn October 2005, SpaceX announced plans to launch Falcon 9 in the first half of 2007.\nThe initial launch would not occur until 2010.\nSpaceX spent its own capital to develop and fly its previous launcher, [Falcon 1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-1), with no pre-arranged sales of launch services.\nSpaceX developed Falcon 9 with private capital as well, but did have pre-arranged commitments by [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa) to purchase several operational flights once specific capabilities were demonstrated.\nMilestone-specific payments were provided under the [Commercial Orbital Transportation Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-orbital-transportation-services) (COTS) program in 2006.\nThe NASA contract was structured as a [Space Act Agreement](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-act-agreement) (SAA) \"to develop and demonstrate commercial orbital transportation service\", including the purchase of three demonstration flights.\nThe overall contract award was US$278 million to provide three demonstration launches of Falcon 9 with the [SpaceX Dragon](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-dragon) cargo spacecraft.\nAdditional milestones were added later, raising the total contract value to US$396 million.\nIn 2008, SpaceX won a [Commercial Resupply Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-resupply-services) (CRS) contract in [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa)'s [Commercial Orbital Transportation Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-orbital-transportation-services) (COTS) program to deliver cargo to ISS using Falcon 9/Dragon.\nFunds would be disbursed only after the demonstration missions were successfully and thoroughly completed.\nThe contract totaled US$1.6 billion for a minimum of 12 missions to ferry supplies to and [from](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-logistics) the ISS.\nIn 2011, SpaceX estimated that Falcon 9 v1.0 development costs were approximately US$300 million.\nNASA estimated development costs of US$3.6 billion had a traditional [cost-plus contract](https://bliptext.com/articles/cost-plus-contract) approach been used.\nA 2011 NASA report \"estimated that it would have cost the agency about US$4 billion to develop a rocket like the Falcon 9 booster based upon NASA's traditional contracting processes\" while \"a more commercial development\" approach might have allowed the agency to pay only US$1.7 billion\".\nIn 2014, SpaceX released combined development costs for Falcon 9 and Dragon.\nNASA provided US$396 million, while SpaceX provided over US$450 million.\nCongressional testimony by SpaceX in 2017 suggested that the unusual NASA process of \"setting only a [high-level requirement](https://bliptext.com/articles/requirement) for cargo transport to the space station [while] leaving the details to industry\" had allowed SpaceX to complete the task at a substantially lower cost.\n\"According to NASA's own independently verified numbers, SpaceX's development costs of both the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets were estimated at approximately $390 million in total.\"\n\n## Development\nSpaceX originally intended to follow its [Falcon 1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-1) launch vehicle with an intermediate capacity vehicle, [Falcon 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-5).\nThe Falcon line of vehicles are named after the [Millennium Falcon](https://bliptext.com/articles/millennium-falcon), a fictional starship from the [Star Wars](https://bliptext.com/articles/star-wars) film series.\nIn 2005, SpaceX announced that it was instead proceeding with Falcon 9, a \"fully reusable heavy-lift launch vehicle\", and had already secured a government customer.\nFalcon 9 was described as capable of launching approximately 9500 kg to low Earth orbit and was projected to be priced at US$27 million per flight with a 3.7 m [payload fairing](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) and US$35 million with a 5.2 m fairing.\nSpaceX also announced a heavy version of Falcon 9 with a payload capacity of approximately 25000 kg. Falcon 9 was intended to support LEO and GTO missions, as well as crew and cargo missions to the ISS.\n\n## Testing\nThe original NASA COTS contract called for the first demonstration flight in September 2008, and the completion of all three demonstration missions by September 2009.\nIn February 2008, the date slipped into the first quarter of 2009.\nAccording to Musk, complexity and [Cape Canaveral](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral) regulatory requirements contributed to the delay.\nThe first multi-engine test (two engines firing simultaneously, connected to the first stage) was completed in January 2008.\nSuccessive tests led to a 178-second (mission length), nine engine test-fire in November 2008.\nIn October 2009, the first flight-ready all-engine test fire was at its [test facility in McGregor, Texas](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-rocket-development-and-test-facility).\nIn November, SpaceX conducted the initial second stage test firing, lasting forty seconds.\nIn January 2010, a 329-second (mission length) orbit-insertion firing of the second stage was conducted at McGregor.\nThe elements of the stack arrived at the launch site for integration at the beginning of February, 2010.\nThe flight stack went vertical at [Space Launch Complex 40](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-space-launch-complex-40), [Cape Canaveral](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-air-force-station), and in March, SpaceX performed a static fire test, where the first stage was fired without launch.\nThe test was aborted at T−2 due to a failure in the high-pressure helium pump.\nAll systems up to the abort performed as expected, and no additional issues needed addressing.\nA subsequent test on 13 March fired the first-stage engines for 3.5 seconds.\n\n## Production\nIn December 2010, the SpaceX production line manufactured a Falcon 9 (and Dragon spacecraft) every three months.\nBy September 2013, SpaceX's total manufacturing space had increased to nearly 93000 m2, in order to support a production capacity of 40 rocket cores annually.\nThe factory was producing one Falcon 9 per month.\nBy February 2016 the production rate for Falcon 9 cores had increased to 18 per year, and the number of first stage cores that could be assembled at one time reached six.\nSince 2018, SpaceX has routinely reused first stages, reducing the demand for new cores.\nIn 2023, SpaceX performed 91 launches of Falcon 9 with only 4 using new boosters and successfully recovered the booster on all flights.\nThe [Hawthorne factory](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex) continues to produce one (expendable) second stage for each launch.\n\n# Launch history\n\n## Notable flights and payloads\n# [Falcon 9 flight 20 historic first-stage landing at Cape Canaveral, Landing Zone 1, on 21 December 2015 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/64/ORBCOMM-2///First-Stage///Landing///%2823271687254%29.jpg]\n\n### Notable payloads\n\n# Design\nF9 is a [two-stage](https://bliptext.com/articles/two-stage-to-orbit), [LOX](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen)/[RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1)-powered launch vehicle.\n\n## Specifications\n\n## Engine\nBoth stages are equipped with [Merlin 1D](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) rocket engines.\nEvery Merlin engine produces 854 kN of thrust.\nThey use a [pyrophoric](https://bliptext.com/articles/pyrophoricity) mixture of [triethylaluminum](https://bliptext.com/articles/triethylaluminum)-[triethylborane](https://bliptext.com/articles/triethylborane) (TEA-TEB) as an engine igniter.\nThe booster stage has 9 engines, arranged in a configuration that SpaceX calls [Octaweb](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1).\nThe second stage of the Falcon 9 has 1 short or regular nozzle, [Merlin 1D Vacuum](https://bliptext.com/articles/merlin-1d-vacuum) engine version.\nFalcon 9 is capable of losing up to 2 engines and still complete the mission by burning the remaining engines longer.\nEach [Merlin rocket engine](https://bliptext.com/articles/merlin-rocket-engine-family) is controlled by three [voting](https://bliptext.com/articles/voting-logic) computers, each having 2 CPUs which constantly check the other 2 in the trio.\nThe Merlin 1D engines can [vector thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/thrust-vectoring) to adjust trajectory.\n\n## Tanks\nThe propellant tank walls and domes are made from an [aluminum–lithium alloy](https://bliptext.com/articles/aluminum-lithium-alloy).\nSpaceX uses an all [friction-stir welded](https://bliptext.com/articles/friction-stir-welding) tank, for its strength and reliability.\nThe second stage tank is a shorter version of the first stage tank.\nIt uses most of the same tooling, material, and manufacturing techniques.\nThe F9 interstage, which connects the upper and lower stages, is a carbon-fibre aluminium-core composite structure that holds reusable separation [collets](https://bliptext.com/articles/collet) and a pneumatic pusher system.\nThe original stage separation system had twelve attachment points, reduced to three for v1.1.\n\n## Fairing\nFalcon 9 uses a [payload fairing](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) (nose cone) to protect (non-Dragon) satellites during launch.\nThe fairing is 13 m long, 5.2 m in diameter, weighs approximately 1900 kg, and is constructed of carbon fiber skin overlaid on an aluminum honeycomb core.\nSpaceX designed and fabricates fairings in Hawthorne.\nTesting was completed at NASA's [Plum Brook Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/plum-brook-station) facility in spring 2013 where the acoustic shock and mechanical vibration of launch, plus [electromagnetic](https://bliptext.com/articles/electromagnetic-radiation) [static discharge](https://bliptext.com/articles/static-discharge) conditions, were simulated on a full-size test article in a [vacuum chamber](https://bliptext.com/articles/vacuum-chamber).\nSince 2019, fairings are designed to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere and are reused for future missions.\n# [Fairing F9 - sketch of payload space | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/93/Fairing///F9.png]\n\n## Control systems\nSpaceX uses multiple redundant [flight computers](https://bliptext.com/articles/category-avionics-computers) in a [fault-tolerant design](https://bliptext.com/articles/fault-tolerant-design).\nThe software runs on [Linux](https://bliptext.com/articles/linux) and is written in [C++](https://bliptext.com/articles/c).\nFor flexibility, [commercial off-the-shelf](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-off-the-shelf) parts and system-wide radiation-tolerant design are used instead of [rad-hardened](https://bliptext.com/articles/radiation-hardening) parts.\nEach stage has stage-level flight computers, in addition to the Merlin-specific engine controllers, of the same fault-tolerant triad design to handle stage control functions.\nEach engine [microcontroller](https://bliptext.com/articles/microcontroller) CPU runs on a [PowerPC](https://bliptext.com/articles/powerpc) architecture.\n\n## Legs/fins\nBoosters that will be deliberately expended do not have legs or fins.\nRecoverable boosters include four extensible landing legs attached around the base.\nTo control the core's descent through the atmosphere, SpaceX uses [grid fins](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fins) that deploy from the vehicle moments after stage separation.\nInitially, the V1.2 Full Thrust version of the Falcon 9 were equipped with grid fins made from aluminum, which were eventually replaced by larger, more aerodynamically efficient, and durable titanium fins.\nThe upgraded titanium grid fins, cast and cut from a single piece of titanium, offer significantly better maneuverability and survivability from the extreme heat of re-entry than aluminum grid fins and can be reused indefinitely with minimal refurbishment.\n\n# Versions\nThe Falcon 9 has seen five major revisions: [v1.0](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-0), [v1.1](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-v1-1), [Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) (also called Block 3 or v1.2), Block 4, and [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5).\nV1.0 flew five successful orbital launches from 2010 to 2013.\nThe much larger V1.1 made its first flight in September 2013.\nThe demonstration mission carried a small 500 kg primary payload, the [CASSIOPE](https://bliptext.com/articles/cassiope) satellite.\nLarger payloads followed, starting with the launch of the [SES-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-8) [GEO](https://bliptext.com/articles/geostationary-orbit) [communications satellite](https://bliptext.com/articles/communications-satellite).\nBoth v1.0 and v1.1 used [expendable launch vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/expendable-launch-vehicle) (ELVs).\nThe [Falcon 9 Full Thrust](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-full-thrust) made its first flight in December 2015.\nThe first stage of the Full Thrust version was [reusable](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-vehicle).\nThe current version, known as [Falcon 9 Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5), made its first flight in May 2018.\n# [450px | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/Falcon///9///version///comparison.png]\n\n## V1.0\nF9 v1.0 was an expendable launch vehicle developed from 2005 to 2010.\nIt flew for the first time in 2010.\nV1.0 made five flights, after which it was retired.\nThe first stage was powered by nine [Merlin 1C](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin) engines arranged in a 3 × 3 grid.\nEach had a sea-level thrust of 556 kN for a total liftoff thrust of about 5000 kN.\nThe second stage was powered by a single [Merlin 1C engine modified for vacuum operation](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-merlin), with an [expansion ratio](https://bliptext.com/articles/expansion-ratio) of 117:1 and a nominal burn time of 345 seconds.\nGaseous N2 thrusters were used on the second-stage as a [reaction control system](https://bliptext.com/articles/reaction-control-system) (RCS).\nEarly attempts to add a lightweight [thermal protection system](https://bliptext.com/articles/thermal-protection-system) to the booster stage and parachute recovery were not successful.\nIn 2011, SpaceX began a formal [development program](https://bliptext.com/articles/new-product-development) for a [reusable Falcon 9](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-reusable-launch-system-development-program), initially focusing on the first stage.\n# [A Falcon 9 v1.0 being launched with a Dragon spacecraft to deliver cargo to the ISS in 2012 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/SpX///CRS-2///launch///-///further///-///cropped.jpg]\n\n## V1.1\nV1.1 is 60% heavier with 60% more thrust than v1.0.\nIts nine (more powerful) Merlin 1D engines were rearranged into an \"octagonal\" pattern that SpaceX called Octaweb.\nThis is designed to simplify and streamline manufacturing.\nThe fuel tanks were 60% longer, making the rocket more susceptible to [bending](https://bliptext.com/articles/bending-moment) during flight.\nThe v1.1 first stage offered a total sea-level thrust at liftoff of 5885 kN, with the engines burning for a nominal 180 seconds.\nThe stage's thrust rose to 6672 kN as the booster climbed out of the atmosphere.\nThe stage separation system was redesigned to reduce the number of attachment points from twelve to three, and the vehicle had upgraded avionics and software.\nThese improvements increased the payload capability from 9000 kg to 13150 kg. SpaceX president [Gwynne Shotwell](https://bliptext.com/articles/gwynne-shotwell) stated the v1.1 had about 30% more payload capacity than published on its price list, with the extra margin reserved for [returning stages via powered re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-returnable-rocket).\nDevelopment testing of the first stage was completed in July 2013, and it first flew in September 2013.\nThe second stage igniter propellant lines were later insulated to better support in-space restart following long coast phases for orbital trajectory maneuvers.\nFour extensible carbon fiber/aluminum [honeycomb](https://bliptext.com/articles/honeycomb-structure) landing legs were included on later flights where landings were attempted.\nSpaceX pricing and payload specifications published for v1.1 included about 30% more performance than the published price list indicated; SpaceX reserved the additional performance to perform [reusability testing](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-first-stage-landing-tests).\nMany engineering changes to support reusability and recovery of the first stage were made for v1.1.\n# [Falcon 9 v1.0 (left) and v1.1 (right) engine configurations | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Falcon///9///v1.0///and///v1.1///engine.svg]\n# [The launch of the first Falcon 9 v1.1 from Vandenberg SLC-4 (Falcon 9 Flight 6) in September 2013 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Launch///of///Falcon///9///carrying///CASSIOPE///%28130929-F-ET475-012%29.jpg]\n\n## Full Thrust\nThe Full Thrust upgrade (also known as FT, v1.2 or Block 3), made major changes.\nIt added cryogenic propellant cooling to increase density allowing 17% higher thrust, improved the stage separation system, stretched the second stage to hold additional propellant, and strengthened struts for holding helium bottles believed to have been involved with the failure of flight 19.\nIt offered a [reusable first stage](https://bliptext.com/articles/reusable-launch-vehicle).\nPlans to reuse the second-stage were abandoned as the weight of a heat shield and other equipment would reduce payload too much.\nThe reusable booster was developed using systems and software tested on the Falcon 9 prototypes.\nThe [Autonomous Flight Safety System](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-flight-safety-system) (AFSS) replaced the ground-based mission flight control personnel and equipment.\nAFSS offered on-board Positioning, Navigation and Timing sources and decision logic.\nThe benefits of AFSS included increased public safety, reduced reliance on range infrastructure, reduced range spacelift cost, increased schedule predictability and availability, operational flexibility, and launch slot flexibility\".\nFT's capacity allowed SpaceX to choose between increasing payload, decreasing launch price, or both.\nIts [first successful landing](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-flight-20) came in December 2015 and the [first reflight](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) in March 2017.\nIn February 2017, [CRS-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-10) launch was the first operational launch utilizing AFSS.\nAll SpaceX launches after 16 March used AFSS.\nA 25 June mission carried the second batch of ten [Iridium NEXT](https://bliptext.com/articles/iridium-satellite-constellation) satellites, for which the aluminum [grid fins](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fin) were replaced by larger [titanium](https://bliptext.com/articles/titanium) versions, to improve control authority, and heat tolerance during [re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/atmospheric-entry).\n# [A close-up of the newer titanium grid fins first flown for the second Iridium NEXT mission in June 2017 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0d/Second-generation///titanium///grid///fins%2C///Iridium-2///Mission///%2835533873795%29.jpg]\n\n## Block 4\nIn 2017, SpaceX started including incremental changes to the Full Thrust, internally dubbed Block 4.\nInitially, only the second stage was modified to Block 4 standards, flying on top of a Block 3 first stage for three missions: [NROL-76](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-nro-launches) and [Inmarsat-5 F5](https://bliptext.com/articles/inmarsat) in May 2017, and [Intelsat 35e](https://bliptext.com/articles/intelsat-35e) in July 2017.\nBlock 4 was described as a transition between the Full Thrust v1.2 Block 3 and [Block 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-block-5).\nIt includes incremental engine thrust upgrades leading to Block 5.\nThe maiden flight of the full Block 4 design (first and second stages) was the [SpaceX CRS-12](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-12) mission on 14 August.\n\n## Block 5\nIn October 2016, Musk described Block 5 as coming with \"a lot of minor refinements that collectively are important, but uprated thrust and improved legs are the most significant\".\nIn January 2017, Musk added that Block 5 \"significantly improves performance and ease of reusability\".\nThe maiden flight took place on 11 May 2018, with the [Bangabandhu Satellite-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bangabandhu-satellite-1) satellite.\n\n# Capabilities\n\n## Performance\n\n## Reliability\nAs of, Falcon 9 had achieved out of full mission successes.\n[SpaceX CRS-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-1) succeeded in its primary mission, but left a secondary payload in a wrong orbit, while [SpaceX CRS-7](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-7) was destroyed in flight.\nIn addition, [AMOS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/amos-6) disintegrated on the launch pad during fueling for an engine test.\nBlock 5 has a success rate of (/).\nFor comparison, the industry benchmark [Soyuz series](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-rocket-family) has performed 1880 launches with a success rate of 95.1% (the latest [Soyuz-2](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-2)'s success rate is 94%), the Russian [Proton series](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-rocket-family) has performed 425 launches with [a success rate of 88.7%](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-proton-launches) (the latest [Proton-M](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-m)'s success rate is 90.1%), the European [Ariane 5](https://bliptext.com/articles/ariane-5) has performed 117 launches with a success rate of 95.7%, and Chinese [Long March 3B](https://bliptext.com/articles/long-march-3b) has performed 85 launches with a success rate of 95.3%.\nF9's launch sequence includes a hold-down feature that allows full engine ignition and systems check before liftoff.\nAfter the first-stage engine starts, the launcher is held down and not released for flight until all propulsion and vehicle systems are confirmed to be operating normally.\nSimilar hold-down systems have been used on launch vehicles such as [Saturn V](https://bliptext.com/articles/saturn-v) and [Space Shuttle](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-shuttle).\nAn automatic safe shut-down and unloading of propellant occur if any abnormal conditions are detected.\nPrior to the launch date, [SpaceX](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex) sometimes completes a test cycle, culminating in a three-and-a-half second first stage engine static firing.\nF9 has [triple-redundant](https://bliptext.com/articles/triple-modular-redundancy) flight computers and [inertial navigation](https://bliptext.com/articles/inertial-navigation-system), with a [GPS](https://bliptext.com/articles/global-positioning-system) overlay for additional accuracy.\n\n## Engine-out capability\nLike the [Saturn](https://bliptext.com/articles/saturn-rocket-family) family of rockets, multiple engines allow for mission completion even if one fails.\nDetailed descriptions of destructive engine failure modes and designed-in engine-out capabilities were made public.\nSpaceX emphasized that the first stage is designed for \"engine-out\" capability.\n[CRS-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-1) in October 2012 was a partial success after engine number 1 lost pressure at 79 seconds, and then shut down.\nTo compensate for the resulting loss of acceleration, the first stage had to burn 28 seconds longer than planned, and the second stage had to burn an extra 15 seconds.\nThat extra burn time reduced fuel reserves so that the likelihood that there was sufficient fuel to execute the mission dropped from 99% to 95%.\nBecause NASA had purchased the launch and therefore contractually controlled several mission decision points, NASA declined SpaceX's request to restart the second stage and attempt to deliver the secondary payload into the correct orbit.\nAs a result, the secondary payload reentered the atmosphere.\nMerlin 1D engines have suffered two premature shutdowns on ascent.\nNeither has affected the primary mission, but both landing attempts failed.\nOn an 18 March 2020 Starlink mission, one of the first stage engines failed 3 seconds before cut-off due to the ignition of some [isopropyl alcohol](https://bliptext.com/articles/isopropyl-alcohol) that was not properly purged after cleaning.\nOn another Starlink mission on 15 February 2021, hot exhaust gasses entered an engine due to a fatigue-related hole in its cover.\nSpaceX stated the failed cover had the \"highest... number of flights that this particular boot [cover] design had seen.\"\n\n## Reusability\nSpaceX planned from the beginning to make both stages reusable.\nThe first stages of early Falcon flights were equipped with parachutes and were covered with a layer of [ablative](https://bliptext.com/articles/ablation) cork to allow them to survive [atmospheric re-entry](https://bliptext.com/articles/atmospheric-re-entry).\nThese were defeated by the accompanying aerodynamic stress and heating.\nThe stages were salt-water corrosion-resistant.\nIn late 2011, SpaceX eliminated parachutes in favor of [powered descent](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-reusable-launch-system-development-program).\nThe design was complete by February 2012.\nPowered landings were first flight-tested with the suborbital [Grasshopper rocket](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-prototypes).\nBetween 2012 and 2013, this low-altitude, low-speed demonstration test vehicle made eight [vertical landings](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing), including a 79-second round-trip flight to an altitude of 744 m. In March 2013, SpaceX announced that as of the first v1.1 flight, every booster would be equipped for powered descent.\n# [Explanatory graphic of Falcon 9's first stage barge landing | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Falcon///9///First///Stage///Reusability///Graphic.jpg]\n\n### Post-mission flight tests and landing attempts\nFor [Flight 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/cassiope) in September 2013, after stage separation, the [flight](https://bliptext.com/articles/flight-test) plan called for the first stage to conduct a burn to reduce its reentry velocity, and then a second burn just before reaching the water.\nAlthough not a complete success, the stage was able to change direction and make a controlled entry into the atmosphere.\nDuring the final landing burn, the RCS thrusters could not overcome an aerodynamically induced spin.\nThe centrifugal force deprived the engine of fuel, leading to early engine shutdown and a hard splashdown.\nAfter four more ocean landing tests, the [CRS-5](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-5) booster attempted a landing on the [ASDS](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) floating platform in January 2015.\nThe rocket incorporated (for the first time in an orbital mission) [grid fin](https://bliptext.com/articles/grid-fin) aerodynamic control surfaces, and successfully guided itself to the ship, before running out of hydraulic fluid and crashing into the platform.\nA second attempt occurred in April 2015, on [CRS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-6).\nAfter the launch, the [bipropellant](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-rocket-propellant) valve became stuck, preventing the control system from reacting rapidly enough for a successful landing.\nThe first attempt to land a booster on a ground pad near the launch site occurred on flight 20, in December 2015.\nThe landing was successful and the booster was recovered.\nThis was [the first time in history](https://bliptext.com/articles/timeline-of-rocket-and-missile-technology) that after launching an orbital mission, a first stage achieved a controlled [vertical landing](https://bliptext.com/articles/vertical-takeoff-vertical-landing).\nThe first successful booster landing on an [ASDS](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) occurred in April 2016 on the drone ship [Of Course I Still Love You](https://bliptext.com/articles/autonomous-spaceport-drone-ship) during [CRS-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-8).\nSixteen test flights were conducted from 2013 to 2016, six of which achieved a soft landing and booster recovery.\nSince January 2017, with the exceptions of the centre core from the [[Falcon Heavy](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy) test flight](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy-test-flight), [Falcon Heavy](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-heavy) [USAF](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-air-force) [STP-2](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-test-program) mission, the [Falcon 9 CRS-16](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-16) resupply mission and the [Starlink](https://bliptext.com/articles/starlink)-4, 5, and 19 missions, every landing attempt has been successful.\nTwo boosters have been lost or destroyed at sea after landing: the center core used during the [Arabsat-6A](https://bliptext.com/articles/arabsat-6a) mission, and [B1058](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-b1058) after completing a Starlink flight.\n# [Falcon 9's first stage successfully landing on an ASDS for the first time, following the launch of SpaceX CRS-8 to the ISS | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fc/CRS-8///first///stage///landing///%2826366878046%29.jpg]\n\n### Relaunch\nThe first operational relaunch of a previously flown booster was accomplished in March 2017 with [B1021](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) on the [SES-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-10) mission after [CRS-8](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-crs-8) in April 2016.\nAfter landing a second time, it was retired.\nIn June 2017, booster [B1029](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters) helped carry [BulgariaSat-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bulgariasat-1) towards GTO after an [Iridium NEXT](https://bliptext.com/articles/iridium-satellite-constellation) LEO mission in January 2017, again achieving reuse and landing of a recovered booster.\nThe third reuse flight came in November 2018 on the [SSO-A](https://bliptext.com/articles/sherpa-space-tug) mission.\nThe core for the mission, [Falcon 9 B1046](https://bliptext.com/articles/falcon-9-b1046), was the first Block 5 booster produced, and had flown initially on the [Bangabandhu Satellite-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/bangabandhu-satellite-1) mission.\nIn May 2021 the first booster reached 10 missions.\nMusk indicated that SpaceX intends to fly boosters until they see a failure in Starlink missions.\nAs of, the record is flights by the same booster.\n# [The first reflight of a Falcon 9, in March 2017 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/SES-10///Launch///-///world%27s///first///reflight///of///an///orbital///class///rocket///%2832915200224%29.jpg]\n\n### Recovery of fairings\nSpaceX developed [payload fairings](https://bliptext.com/articles/payload-fairing) equipped with a steerable parachute as well as RCS thrusters that can be recovered and reused.\nA payload fairing half was recovered following a soft-landing in the ocean for the first time in March 2017, following [SES-10](https://bliptext.com/articles/ses-10).\nSubsequently, [development began on a ship-based system](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-fairing-recovery-program) involving a massive net, in order to catch returning fairings.\nTwo dedicated ships were outfitted for this role, making their first catches in 2019.\nHowever, following mixed success, SpaceX returned to water landings and wet recovery.\n\n### Recovery of second stages\nDespite public statements that they would endeavor to make the second-stage reusable as well, by late 2014, SpaceX determined that the mass needed for a heat shield, landing engines, and other equipment to support recovery of the second stage was prohibitive, and abandoned second-stage reusability efforts.\n\n# Launch sites\nBy early 2018, F9 was regularly launching from three [orbital launch sites](https://bliptext.com/articles/spaceport): [Launch Complex 39A](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center-launch-complex-39a) of the [Kennedy Space Center](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center), [Space Launch Complex 4E](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-launch-complex-4e) of [Vandenberg Air Force Base](https://bliptext.com/articles/vandenberg-air-force-base), and [Space Launch Complex 40](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-space-launch-complex-40) at [Cape Canaveral Air Force Station](https://bliptext.com/articles/cape-canaveral-air-force-station).\nThe latter was damaged in the [AMOS-6](https://bliptext.com/articles/amos-6) accident in September 2016, but was operational again by December 2017.\nOn April 21, 2023, the [United States Space Force](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-space-force), [Space Launch Delta 30](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-launch-delta-30) granted SpaceX permission to lease [Vandenberg Space Launch Complex 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/vandenberg-space-launch-complex-6) for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy launches.\nSLC-6 is likely to become the fourth launch site for Falcon 9.\n# [SpaceX's Falcon 9 rocket delivered the ABS-3A and Eutelsat 115 West B satellites to a supersynchronous transfer orbit, launching from Space Launch Complex 40 at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida in March 2015 | upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/Launch///of///Falcon///9///carrying///ABS-EUTELSAT///%2816510241270%29.jpg]\n\n# Pricing\nAt the time of Falcon 9's 2010 maiden flight, the price of a v1.0 launch was listed from US$49.9–56 million.\nThe list price increased thereafter, to US$54–59.5 million (2012).\nUS$56.5 million (v1.1, August 2013), US$61.2 million (June 2014), US$62 million (Full Thrust, May 2016), to US$ <30 million (2024).\n[Dragon](https://bliptext.com/articles/spacex-dragon) cargo missions to the ISS have an average cost of US$133 million under a fixed-price contract with [NASA](https://bliptext.com/articles/nasa), including the cost of the spacecraft.\nThe 2013 [DSCOVR](https://bliptext.com/articles/deep-space-climate-observatory) mission, launched with Falcon 9 for [National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration](https://bliptext.com/articles/national-oceanic-and-atmospheric-administration) (NOAA), cost US$97 million.\nIn 2004, [Elon Musk](https://bliptext.com/articles/elon-musk) stated, \"Ultimately, I believe 500 per pound (1100/kg) [of payload delivered to orbit] or less is very achievable\".\nAt its 2016 launch price with a full LEO payload, Full Thrust launch costs reached US1200 $/lb.\nIn 2011, Musk estimated that fuel and oxidizer for v1.0 cost about US$200,000.\nThe first stage uses 245620 L of [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and 146020 L of [RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1) fuel, while the second stage uses 28000 L of [liquid oxygen](https://bliptext.com/articles/liquid-oxygen) and 17000 L of [RP-1](https://bliptext.com/articles/rp-1).\nBy 2018, F9's decreased launch costs drew competitors.\n[Arianespace](https://bliptext.com/articles/arianespace) began working on [Ariane 6](https://bliptext.com/articles/ariane-6), [United Launch Alliance](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-launch-alliance) (ULA) on [Vulcan Centaur](https://bliptext.com/articles/vulcan-centaur), and [International Launch Services](https://bliptext.com/articles/international-launch-services) (ILS) on [Proton Medium](https://bliptext.com/articles/proton-medium).\nOn 26 June 2019, Jonathan Hofeller (SpaceX vice president of commercial sales) said that price discounts given to early customers on mission with reused boosters had become the standard price.\nIn October 2019, Falcon 9's \"base price\" of US$62 million per launch was lowered to US$52 million for flights scheduled in 2021 and beyond.\nOn 10 April 2020, [Roscosmos](https://bliptext.com/articles/roscosmos) administrator [Dmitry Rogozin](https://bliptext.com/articles/dmitry-rogozin), said that his outfit was cutting prices by 30%, alleging that SpaceX was price dumping by charging commercial customers US$60 million per flight while charging NASA between 1.5 and 4 times as much for the same flight.\nMusk denied the claim and replied that the price difference reflected that the Falcon 9s were 80% reusable, while Russian rockets were single use.\nULA CEO [Tory Bruno](https://bliptext.com/articles/tory-bruno) stated \"Our estimate remains around 10 flights as a fleet average to achieve a consistent breakeven point ... and that no one has come anywhere close\".\nHowever, Elon Musk responded \"payload reduction due to reusability of booster and fairing is <40% for Falcon 9 and recovery and refurb is <10%, so you're roughly even with 2 flights, definitely ahead with 3\".\n[CNBC](https://bliptext.com/articles/cnbc) reported in April 2020 that the [United States Air Force](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-air-force)'s launches were costing US$95 million due to extra security.\nSpaceX executive Christopher Couluris stated that reusing rockets could bring prices even lower, that it \"costs 28 million to launch it, that's with everything\".\nIn 2024, it was stated that SpaceX's internal costs for launching a Falcon 9 were \"significantly less than $20 million\", achieved through the reuse rocket's first stage and payload fairings.\nHowever, this figure is difficult to verify.\n\n## Rideshare payload programs\nSpaceX provides two rideshare programs, regularly scheduled Falcon 9 flights for small satellite deployment: Transporter and Bandwagon.\nThe Transporter program started in 2021 and specializes in delivering payloads to sun-synchronous orbits, primarily serving Earth observation missions, with flights typically operating every four months.\nThe Bandwagon program started in 2024, offers access to mid-inclination orbits of approximately 45 degrees, with flights typically operating every six months.\nUnlike traditional secondary payload arrangements, these programs do not rely on a primary mission.\nInstead, SpaceX provides a unique \"cake topper\" option for larger satellites between 500 and 2500 kg.\nSpaceX also offers more traditional rideshares where small satellites piggyback on the launch of a large primary payload.\nIn the past, the company has offered clients the option to mount payloads using the [EELV Secondary Payload Adapter](https://bliptext.com/articles/eelv-secondary-payload-adapter) (ESPA) ring, the same [interstage adapter](https://bliptext.com/articles/multistage-rocket) first used for launching secondary payloads on [US DoD](https://bliptext.com/articles/united-states-department-of-defense) missions that use the [Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/evolved-expendable-launch-vehicle) (EELV) [Atlas V](https://bliptext.com/articles/atlas-v) and [Delta IV](https://bliptext.com/articles/delta-iv).\nEven though the Falcon 9 is a medium-lift launch vehicle, through these programs, SpaceX has become the leading provider of rideshare launches.\nGiven the company's frequent launch cadence and low prices, operators of [small-lift launch vehicles](https://bliptext.com/articles/small-lift-launch-vehicle) have found it difficult to compete.\n\n# Public display of Falcon 9 vehicles\nSpaceX first put a Falcon 9 ([B1019](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) on public display at their headquarters in [Hawthorne, California](https://bliptext.com/articles/hawthorne-california), in 2016.\nIn 2019, SpaceX donated a Falcon 9 (B1035) to [Space Center Houston](https://bliptext.com/articles/space-center-houston), in [Houston, Texas](https://bliptext.com/articles/houston-texas).\nIt was a booster that flew two missions, \"the 11th and 13th [supply missions](https://bliptext.com/articles/commercial-resupply-services) to the International Space Station [and was] the first Falcon 9 rocket NASA agreed to fly a second time\".\nIn 2021, SpaceX donated a Falcon Heavy side booster ([B1023](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) to the [Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex](https://bliptext.com/articles/kennedy-space-center-visitor-complex).\nIn 2023, a Falcon 9 ([B1021](https://bliptext.com/articles/list-of-falcon-9-first-stage-boosters)) has been put on public display outside [Dish Network](https://bliptext.com/articles/dish-network)'s headquarters in [Littleton, Colorado](https://bliptext.com/articles/littleton-colorado).\n\n# Influence on space industry\nThe Russian space agency has launched the development of [Soyuz-7 (Amur)](https://bliptext.com/articles/soyuz-7-rocket-family) which shares many similarities with Falcon 9, including a reusable first stage that will land vertically with the help of legs.\nThe first launch is planned for 2028-2030.\nChina's [Beijing Tianbing Technology](https://bliptext.com/articles/beijing-tianbing-technology) company is developing [Tianlong-3](https://bliptext.com/articles/tianlong-3), which is benchmarked against Falcon 9.\nIn 2024, China’s central government designated commercial space as a key industry for support, with the reusable medium-lift launchers being necessary to deploy China’s planned low Earth orbit [communications megaconstellations](https://bliptext.com/articles/satellite-internet-constellation).","revisionCount":2},"hasMore":false,"nextCursor":null}

History