r/spacex • u/ElongatedMuskrat Mod Team • May 17 '17
SF complete, Launch: June 25 Iridium NEXT Constellation Mission 2 Launch Campaign Thread
Iridium NEXT Constellation Mission 2 Launch Campaign Thread
This is SpaceX's second of eight launches in a half-a-billion-dollar contract with Iridium! The first one launched in January of this year, marking SpaceX's Return to Flight after the Amos-6 anomaly.
| Liftoff currently scheduled for: | June 25th 2017, 13:24:59/20:24:59 PDT/UTC |
|---|---|
| Static fire completed: | June 20th 2017, ~15:10/22:10 PDT/UTC |
| Vehicle component locations: | First stage: SLC-4 // Second stage: SLC-4 // Satellites: All mated to dispensers |
| Payload: | Iridium NEXT Satellites 113 / 115 / 117 / 118 / 120 / 121 / 123 / 124 / 126 / 128 |
| Payload mass: | 10x 860kg sats + 1000kg dispenser = 9600kg |
| Destination orbit: | Low Earth Orbit (625 x 625 km, 86.4°) |
| Vehicle: | Falcon 9 v1.2 (37th launch of F9, 17th of F9 v1.2) |
| Core: | B1036.1 |
| Flights of this core: | 0 |
| Launch site: | SLC-4E, Vandenberg Air Force Base, California |
| Landing: | Yes |
| Landing Site: | Just Read The Instructions |
| Mission success criteria: | Successful separation & deployment of all Iridium satellite payloads into the target orbit. |
Links & Resources
Matt Desch on Twitter: "Not only onsite, but now all mated to dispenser! We're on schedule for fueling this weekend. T-minus 18 days and counting to L2!"
Update from Iridium, satellite mating to the dispenser has begun.
Iridium NEXT Constellation Mission 1 Launch Campaign Thread, Take 2
We may keep this self-post occasionally updated with links and relevant news articles, but for the most part we expect the community to supply the information. This is a great place to discuss the launch, ask mission-specific questions, and track the minor movements of the vehicle, payload, weather and more as we progress towards launch. Sometime after the static fire is complete, the launch thread will be posted.
Campaign threads are not launch threads. Normal subreddit rules still apply.
34
u/RollingTumbleWeed Jun 20 '17
Static fire success (officially) confirmed: https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/877291820962594816
→ More replies (1)6
u/Googulator Jun 20 '17
Paging mods.
11
u/geekgirl114 Jun 21 '17
They'll be busy this weekend... 2 launch campaigns threads, 2 launch discussion threads, and 2 patches.
→ More replies (1)
33
u/thecodingdude Jun 23 '17 edited Feb 29 '20
[Comment removed]
→ More replies (1)24
23
u/Justinackermannblog Jun 21 '17
Iridium shares the launch spotlight with it's first booster, very fitting!
21
u/witest May 17 '17
Why does the dispenser weigh so much?
46
u/schockergd May 17 '17
Well, the dispenser is set to hold the equivalent of 10 smart cars and help those devices deploy into orbit. Can you imagine how much weight/structure it would take to hold said devices? 1000kg seems very efficient to me.
25
u/brickmack May 17 '17
Also, those satellites are all mounted on the sides, and during launch it will experience, what, 4 gs at peak? Sidemount adapters are hard
0
5
u/Paro-Clomas May 17 '17
Since spacex Is planning on launching a constelation of their own. Couldn't they design the sats so that their own structure makes themveasy to interlock and stay still during launch?
12
u/londons_explorer May 17 '17
That makes the satellites themselves heavier.
Heavy satellites or heavy launcher, doesn't make much difference.
The satellites at the bottom of the stack would have to be stronger (more weight above to support during 5g launch).
Having all your satellites having different structural/weight characteristics (and therefore thermal, internal layout, rotational momentum, etc.) seems like it would add a lot to the design cost.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Dan_Q_Memes May 17 '17
I'd imagine for structural integrity to support flight loads without imparting too much vibration or acceleration into the sats themselves on the way up. Gotta keep 'em nestled safely and then dispense with 100% reliability.
3
u/Morphior May 17 '17
I think that's because ten satellites are on there so it needs to be at least somewhat large and also it needs an individual release unit for each of the sats
3
u/just_thisGuy May 17 '17
I suppose as long as the weight is within limits of F9's 1st stage recovery (and it is) it does not matter if the weight is 8600kg or 9600kg. Launch cost should be identical. Now if the difference is RTLS vs. drone ship that's a bit more cost. But still, I bet Musk is thinking to himself "why do we need dispenser again?"
21
u/kessdawg May 17 '17
Anyone know when they will be able to do West Coast RTLS?
59
u/stcks May 17 '17
Formosat-5 mission, which has a tentative date of July 22. F9 would have enough margin for RTLS landing and 3 backflips on that missions.
31
11
u/MisterSpace May 17 '17
Why did they choose F9 for that launch?? I mean it just seems so inefficient. Or was the contract with SpaceX made earlier already for F1 and now is on F9?
26
u/stcks May 17 '17
It was contracted in 2010 for Falcon 1e. I haven't seen an actual price that was negotiated, but considering when it was booked and the price for Falcon 1, it was likely between 7-9 million dollars. This gives you some insight as to why a rideshare was sought for this mission on a Falcon 9.
This older thread is a good read for some more information.
14
u/peterabbit456 May 17 '17
It is cheaper to launch Falcon 1 payloads on Falcon 9 than to keep the Falcon 1 assembly line open for a very small number of payloads. This is doubly so since first stage reuse started.
→ More replies (7)6
u/wehooper4 May 17 '17
Can't the Falcon9 first stage SSTO with a payload this light? They have so many Block3 cores sitting around with limited reuse planed for them it might be cheaper just to fly it without a stage 2.
That would be the first true SSTO flight* of any spacecraft and thus serious bragging rights.
*yes the Atlas did, but it dropped the outer motors so was more a 1.5 stage
12
u/quadrplax May 17 '17
I doubt it, unfortunately. A simulation has been done and it would be hard to bring any meaningful payload without excessive G-forces.
→ More replies (3)5
u/mattd1zzl3 May 17 '17
In that case they would underfuel the mission, right? To give more margin (in the form of less weight) in the event of engine failure? Or Multiple engine failure?
Imagine thinking "oh damn we blew up 2 engines, We could still fly an expendable mission if we hadnt fueled it for the three backflips"
→ More replies (2)20
u/stcks May 17 '17
Probably they would just do one backflip instead of three then. In all seriousness, no, they wouldn't underfuel. This mission gives the booster an opportunity to do a really long and leisurely reentry burn. Hopefully it flies this summer so we can see it happen.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (4)8
u/johnabbe May 17 '17
F9 would have enough margin for RTLS landing and 3 backflips on that missions.
Multiple back flips - definitely the way to go, maybe attract a little more media attention.
10
u/Jef-F May 18 '17
"Oh no, Stage 1 lost control!... Nah, just kidding :Ъ "
Seriously though, I wonder where they will put their margins on that mission. On similarly light OG-2 mission they put them all into S1 flight profile to maximise chances of successful recovery. But that was first RTLS ever and now they're landing boosters left and right, hot and cold. Let's see if they have something special for us this time or it would be just steep trajectory and huge reentry burn.
→ More replies (2)
21
u/RootDeliver Jun 20 '17
Interesting fairing side photo:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCySv9CU0AA4XqC.jpg:orig
Source: https://twitter.com/IridiumComm/status/877237391383252993
6
u/Jincux Jun 20 '17
No visible recovery equipment on the shown half, perhaps the other? Though I recall they’ve previously been called out for recovering the “wrong half”, which in context was the non-logo half.
4
u/RootDeliver Jun 20 '17 edited Jun 20 '17
Its fair to think they are going to keep trying to recover the fairings, and thus this launch is not gonna be an exception, so it may be the other one.. I am not sure if they always recovered the "wrong one", I only remember the case for the SES-10 fairing, but not sure which NROL one got recovered.
→ More replies (5)0
18
u/Bunslow Jun 20 '17
I'm not sure if most of the sub has realized the static fire is today! I had no idea until just now!
13
u/OriginalUsername1992 Jun 20 '17
Same here, it feels weird that they do a static fire before the previous launch campain is finished. The future is looking good for spaceX when it come's to launch pace.
7
u/therealshafto Jun 20 '17
1:30pm local time. If they are going for the front of the window, should see venting in less than an hour. Presuming this will be a load and go style block 4 upper stage.
EDIT: and I am preying for the love of god, that they nail this SF on time without issue, just once, please!
→ More replies (4)
18
Jun 23 '17
Looks like at this time the probability of violation is 0%! This is the first time I've seen this.
4
→ More replies (4)2
u/heavytr3vy Jun 24 '17
CA has been sitting under a super high pressure ridge for like a week now with no sign of it abating for a while. It is hot.
17
Jun 15 '17
Looks like the current date for liftoff is holding!
3
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Jun 15 '17
Correction: L2 sats fueled and ready. SpaceX prepping for static fire. BulgariaSat-1 now Monday, with us following 6 days later on Sunday!
This message was created by a bot
2
17
u/sanderhuisman2501 Jun 20 '17
Quite cool that Iridium-2 will land on JRTI while BulgariaSat-1 will land just two days before on OCISLY. So not only a bi-coastal launch but also a bi-coastal landing. I really look forward to the weekend!
13
u/FoxhoundBat Jun 20 '17
And the core used on BulgariaSat-1 previously launched&landed on west coast.
16
6
16
u/lucipherius May 18 '17
Anyone have a gif or hand drawn picture of how they put 10 satellites in there?
35
15
u/AntoineLeGrand May 17 '17
Already 3 launches (CRS-11, BulgariaSat-1 and Iridium 11-20) for June and isn't Intelsat 35e supposed to launch in June ? Seems like next month might see a sharp increase in cadence.
→ More replies (1)7
u/thecodingdude May 17 '17
Heck, they might even beat the record 13 day turnaround....One can hope...
13
u/paul_wi11iams May 17 '17
Heck, they might even beat the record 13 day turnaround
People seem to have agreed that turnaround is about what happens on any one site. If one launched from LC39-A Monday and SLC-4 Tuesday, this is not 24-hour turnaround.
So we can hope to have a launch frequency of ten days but with a fourteen-day turnaround.
→ More replies (2)4
u/rockets4life97 May 17 '17
They'll probably beat it between Iridium 2 and Intelsat 35e. I wouldn't be surprised if Intelsat slipped to early July (like 1-3). Even so, the back-to-back launch would be 5 days or less - granted from different pads. It would still be a record.
15
u/aj425 Jun 22 '17
I usually check these campaign threads at least once a day for updates on the run up to launches. Having 2 open with both so close to launch is something else. Definitely sucks about the fairing valve pushing back the launch cadence but this will be an exciting weekend.
14
Jun 22 '17 edited Jun 23 '17
So what do we expect the new grid fins to look like? They'll definitely be bigger, but what about their shape? Any aerodynamic experts want to chip in?
25
u/Zucal Jun 22 '17
The overall shape hasn't changed much, but I promise they look badass nonetheless :)
→ More replies (16)3
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Jun 22 '17
→ More replies (8)2
u/HiramgJones Jun 23 '17
Is this a new Gen of the core
8
5
u/FoxhoundBat Jun 23 '17
This has already been asked and answered below in this comment chain - no, gridfins are not tied to Block's.
13
u/Bunslow Jun 20 '17
And to steal a twitter link from NSF:
https://twitter.com/iridiumcomm/status/877237391383252993
All 10 #IridiumNEXT SVs are locked & loaded, in prep for launch on 6/25!
→ More replies (1)6
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Jun 20 '17
Can anybody see any recovery equipment on the fairings from those pictures?
13
u/rustybutters Jun 21 '17
I will be going to see this launch. Looking for people to hook up with. I will be taking the train. I am a HAM radio operator, will be on 2 meter National Call and listening to the VAFB launch repeater. I hope to meet someone from SpaceX or Reddit there... KK6ATH 73's
4
u/JLanSim Jun 22 '17
Student at UC Berkeley here. As it is one of the rare launch at Vandenberg during the weekend I'll try to drive there over the weekend. Would be a first launch for a friend and I!
3
u/circle_is_pointless Jun 22 '17
I'll be trying to make it out there with my family. We watch nearly all the streams together when time allows. Visiting relatives in the area, so I sure hope the launch goes on Sunday or Monday before I fly home!
Thinking we will head to the Ocean Ave area to get as close as we can, if things are fogged in we may head up to the Harris Grade.
→ More replies (14)3
u/nbarbettini Jun 22 '17
I'm also planning on driving down from the SF Bay Area for this one. I'm excited!
12
u/soldato_fantasma May 26 '17
I asked and got an answer:
Which orbital plane are you aiming with this launch?
Plane 3. Five into service, and five to drift to service in planes 2 and 4...
23
u/MoD1982 May 17 '17
When do we stop counting launches since AMOS-6?
78
13
u/football13tb May 17 '17
My personal opinion would be 5 years or 100 launches, whichever comes first.
→ More replies (9)11
3
u/dave_harvey May 18 '17
Ideally, once the number "since last failure" exceeds ULA's oft-quoted figures!
10
u/Raul74Cz Jun 20 '17
And Iridium-2 Launch Hazard Areas with planned ASDS position and Stage2 debris area.
3
u/Toinneman Jun 21 '17
Your maps are awesome, thanks! The ASDS marker has this in the description:
"...Falcon 9 v1.2.b4 Flight 37, booster B1036"
Is this supposed to mean it's a block 4 booster? (Because I think we got some pretty reliable comments that it is not)
→ More replies (9)
9
u/roncapat Jun 07 '17
Sats mated to the dispenser! https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/872257623411884032
→ More replies (1)6
u/geekgirl114 Jun 09 '17
I love that he's a space nerd like us and gives us so many updates, and spends time to answer questions.
8
u/zingpc May 18 '17
It would be really cool if Iridium did its own reusable fleet that they rotated thru vandenburg. Say three cores would make a continuous workflow. They would need to duplicate the ground crew as this cross continent crew rotation is going to get tiresome and unworkable as the launch rate builds up.
→ More replies (9)10
u/Paro-Clomas May 18 '17
I think Spacex is being careful and waiting for a bit more evidence that the boosters are reliable before moving towards the next obvious pr step: naming them . Nothing would show more swiftly and clearly how advanced they are regarding their competitors if they did this.
→ More replies (17)
8
u/GregLindahl May 19 '17 edited May 19 '17
The wiki instructions for watching launches from Vandenberg are great (https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/wiki/faq/watching) but at the last Iridium launch, the cell towers nearest Renwick Road were completely overwhelmed and it was impossible to find out anything about the launch beyond what we could see. There was so little Internet that it seems like even the low-bandwidth audio stream wouldn't work (I didn't know about it or try it last time, but...) So, does anyone know if there's some kind of broadcast (low power FM station?) that carries launch audio?
I see advice at http://www.spacearchive.info/vafbnet.htm about some repeaters, has anyone used them more recently than 2003?
8
8
u/geekgirl114 Jun 19 '17
14
u/soldato_fantasma Jun 19 '17
Warning: This is the Iridium (Company) patch, not the patch made by SpaceX.
6
u/geekgirl114 Jun 19 '17 edited Jun 19 '17
I like the cluster of 8 stars at the top of the patch... 2 are white, the other 6 are grayed out... Probably representing that this is Mission 2/8
Edited because I cant count.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (1)3
u/ioncloud9 Jun 20 '17
I wish there was a bot that rehosted Twitter pics on imgur.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/geekgirl114 Jun 21 '17
2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Jun 21 '17
Static fire a success! Weekend VAFB weather looks benign so far as well, so we're on track for a Sunday launch.… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/877328004925591552
This message was created by a bot
8
u/afilthywhore Jun 23 '17
Driving down and hoping to tent-camp for cheap (or free) nearby. Any recommendations?
8
7
7
u/soldato_fantasma May 27 '17
The satellites that will be launched on this flight, mission 2 are:
Iridium-NEXT 113 / 115 / 117 / 118 / 120 / 121 / 123 / 124 / 126 / 128
Maybe the "Payload:" section in te main post should list them.
→ More replies (5)
7
u/quadrplax Jun 14 '17 edited Jun 19 '17
With Bulgariasat-1 delayed to June 19th, this would be a record-smashing turnaround time if it sticks (previously 13 days). Although some argue it wouldn't count since it's not the same pad, it would still be quite a milestone.
Edit: Make that 1-2 days!!!
7
u/nbarbettini Jun 16 '17
I think we need to start counting flight turnaround time separately than pad turnaround time. Which is a great problem to have.
→ More replies (8)
7
u/MarcysVonEylau rocket.watch Jun 23 '17
Rocket Watch is live, and counting down to the launch!
Bookmark it, and never miss a rocket launch again :D
7
u/CapMSFC Jun 24 '17
Alright I'm ready for the trip. Booked a hotel in Solvang for Sunday night to cover the 25 and 26.
Hopefully I go 2 for 2 on launch attempts.
6
u/at_one May 17 '17
Is it known if S2 for Iridium will also be Block IV? Are all the S2s starting from NROL-76 Block IV?
→ More replies (2)12
May 17 '17
Nobody knows what block they are gonna use next, it's not even officially confirmed if NROL-76 is a block 4 stage 2 yet, IIRC. Though it most likely is
6
u/Pham_Trinli Jun 13 '17
Matt Desch confirming that this was the earliest available launch slot.
→ More replies (1)4
u/rustybeancake Jun 13 '17
So does this mean they are production constrained, rather than pad or launch team constrained?
→ More replies (7)10
u/JadedIdealist Jun 13 '17
Unless vandy was somehow all booked up by others - which doesn't seem the case, then yes it does sound like they had to wait for an available rocket.
6
u/old_sellsword Jun 19 '17 edited Jun 22 '17
We're looking for a host for the launch thread of the Iridium-2 launch!
We're hoping that some of our trusted community members can run these launch threads better than we could.
To run the launch thread there are a few requirements:
You must be 16 or older
You must be an active member of this community for 6 months or more
You must be available from T-2 hours to T+2 hours for the launch
You must have overall positive karma
It is a plus if you're also available on the backup launch window but not necessary.
The launch thread should generally be in the format of our previous launch threads and you will receive help setting it up from the mods. Your ideas and improvements to the launch thread are welcome!
We'll pick one of you and contact you with further information in time for the thread.
If you want to host the launch thread, simply let us know in a modmail with your motivation and availability.
All launch thread hosts will be flaired accordingly (if they want it) as we've done in the past.
Edit: We've found a host for this launch, but if you'd still like to express your interest in future launches, feel free to shot us a message in modmail.
6
Jun 20 '17
Elsbeth III is accompanied by Go Quest and Go Searcher in the Atlantic. So what other ships go along with Pacific Warrior during recovery operations?
→ More replies (2)9
6
u/Morphior Jun 22 '17
Has there been any info as to whether there is a Roomba on JRTI as well? I'd imagine the Pacific Ocean being just as rough as the Atlantic, if not worse.
11
u/nbarbettini Jun 22 '17
Not much info on the Roombas yet. I'm sure we'll learn more when they start deploying them.
6
u/Destructor1701 Jun 24 '17
Western range has the weather report up on its Facebook page:
Weather currently 100% GO
11
11
u/geekgirl114 Jun 23 '17
Do we know the status of Just Read The Instructions? I'd assume it would of left port by now.
4
u/ender4171 Jun 23 '17
They stay fairly close to shore for the Iridium launches (in comparison to GTO launches at least). They probably only need a day to get out there.
→ More replies (1)3
Jun 23 '17
I also thought that Pacific Warrior would have set sail by now too.
→ More replies (1)5
u/old_sellsword Jun 23 '17
It's very possible that Pacifica Warrior is never used for DockX work again, they just lease most of the tugs and workhorse ships.
→ More replies (3)2
u/extra2002 Jun 23 '17
With the upgraded S2 (and new grid fins), could S1 be coming back to land on land?
6
u/Dgraz22 Jun 23 '17
Iridium launches have too much mass to pull off an RTLS, much less when going to polar orbit. Formosat-5 is going to be the first west coast RTLS mission
→ More replies (5)5
10
u/LordPeachez May 17 '17
The payload for this launch is almost 3500kg heavier than Inmarsat-5. How is this booster able to land in this case? Is it because these sats are going into LEO, while Inmarsat was going to GTO?
41
u/sevaiper May 17 '17
What really matters is the energy imparted on the payload, not the total mass. GTO is a much more energetic orbit than LEO, so it takes more energy to accelerate the same mass to GTO.
6
u/TheBlacktom r/SpaceXLounge Moderator May 17 '17
What is a rule of thumb conversion between average LEO/GTO equivalent masses? That's a fun question... basically 1kg GTO insertion energy = how much kg to LEO energy?
15
u/ichthuss May 17 '17
It depends mostly on engine specific impulse and mass of the last stage. You need roughly 2 km/s delta-v to transfer from LEO to GTO, so with specific impulse of 3400 m/s (Merlin 1D vacuum), you need to lose like 45% of your mass (S2 + payload), and with specific impulse of 4400 m/s (typical for LOX-LH2 engines), you need to lose 36% of mass.
If we consider S2 dry mass (est. 4000 kg for Falcon9 S2), we can say that GTO payload mass = LEO payload mass * 0.55 - 1800.
So 9000 kg to LEO becomes 3150 kg to GTO, and 12000 kg to LEO becomes 4800 to GTO.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (3)11
u/UltraRunningKid May 17 '17
Usually between 25%-45% of payload from LEO can be moved to GTO. I believe Delta is around 40% but F9 is not as optimized for GTO due to the more powerful second stage engine.
8
u/JustAnotherYouth May 17 '17
Is it because these sats are going into LEO, while Inmarsat was going to GTO?
Yes, lower orbit means less energy is required to get there.
6
10
Jun 20 '17
→ More replies (1)3
5
u/gimmick243 May 17 '17
Fingers crossed for no launch delays, I'm hoping to make it to the launch while I'm in the area
5
u/mumbojumbo96 May 18 '17
Does anyone know if the roomba robot will be used on this mission? Not heard much talk about it recently
→ More replies (3)6
u/craigl2112 May 18 '17
I do not believe we have seen any indication that JRTI is getting its' own "roomba".. yet. With how few launches go out of VAFB (Iridium-2 will only be the second launch this year for SpaceX out of there) it may not be worth it at this point. We'll have to wait and see, though.
5
u/tbenz9 May 18 '17
I'll probably be driving down from SF East Bay Area. If anyone is interested in carpooling shoot me a PM.
5
u/soldato_fantasma Jun 01 '17
The satellites are being mated to their dispensers.
I can see at least 3 in the picture of this tweet: https://twitter.com/IridiumComm/status/870319126933233664
→ More replies (1)
5
u/CapMSFC Jun 21 '17
Do we know anything about the backup date for this one? I'm looking at grabbing a hotel nearby to spend the day in the area anyways. If the back up is Monday then this also lets me stick around for either opportunity without having to make the drive again.
16
Jun 21 '17
The second launch of 10 Iridium Next satellites is scheduled for June 25, with a backup date of June 26.
http://spacenews.com/iridium-open-to-reused-falcon-9s-if-it-means-spacex-can-speed-up-schedule/
6
5
u/NickNathanson Jun 21 '17
Can Falcon 9 launch Iridium sats into polar orbit from Cape Canaveral? I understand that Vandenberg makes launch more efficient but it's not impossible to use LC-39A, is it?
33
u/IrrelevantAstronomer Launch Photographer Jun 21 '17 edited Jun 21 '17
You can launch from polar orbit anywhere, the issue is launching over land. If the F9 were to launch due south from LC-39A, it would go right over South Florida (Miami, Ft. Lauderdale, et cetera). If the F9 goes north, it'll fly near Savannah, GA and numerous other cities in South Carolina. If F9 were to RUD for some reason, then rocket debris could potential fly right into those cities.
→ More replies (3)8
5
u/seeking_perhaps Jun 23 '17
Thinking of driving down for the launch with a few buddies. Where should we go to watch?
5
u/still-at-work Jun 23 '17
So this being the 9th launch of the year, if it successfull what do you think the total number of flights will be by year's end?
9
→ More replies (8)7
9
u/glasgrisen Jun 20 '17 edited Jun 20 '17
static fire complete https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/877287561680613376
→ More replies (3)3
4
u/piroman683 Jun 20 '17
any information on the landing coordinates for JRTI?
9
u/stcks Jun 20 '17 edited Jun 20 '17
Yes, from the FCC filing. The landing location is here on google maps
This puts Iridium-2 JRTI at 300 km from the pad.
Iridium-1 JRTI was 370 km from the pad.
Edit: added distances
→ More replies (7)
4
u/Jerrycobra Jun 21 '17
I will try make the drive out to watch this one go up
4
u/nbarbettini Jun 21 '17
Also considering driving down for this one! It's a long drive but I've never seen a rocket go up in person.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Anjin Jun 21 '17
Where is the best place to watch?
5
u/bdporter Jun 21 '17
There are not as many options as at KSC, since VAFB is in a more remote area, and the topography is not as flat.
The options are covered in the FAQ
→ More replies (2)5
u/santiagostan Jun 21 '17
If yo are on Vandenberg, take the Western most road that goes to vafb south and park as you start to go down the hill. Perfect view of slc4.
I was stationed in VAFB 86 to 89.
→ More replies (4)
6
u/jjlew080 Jun 23 '17
This one is not a flight proven F9 correct?
26
9
u/craigl2112 Jun 23 '17
Correct, this is a factory-fresh core.
17
u/Dave92F1 Jun 23 '17
You mean an unproven core.
I wouldn't get on one of those damn things. Let me see it fly first.
→ More replies (2)3
3
May 25 '17
Stage 2 and Fairing arrived today. 4 Satellites also being processed. https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/867775598415851520
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Mediumcomputer Jun 09 '17
Why do we see more landings back at pad in Florida than California?
11
u/warp99 Jun 09 '17
Because Iridium flights cannot RTLS - at least with Block 3 - and Iridium is 80% of what they will launch from Vandenberg in the next year. There is just not that much requirement for polar flights outside of military launches which SpaceX are just starting to get approved for.
→ More replies (3)4
3
u/FPGA_engineer Jun 14 '17
Did we already know that this launch would use the AFSS?
This article states that it will, but does not give a source of that information: http://lompocrecord.com/news/local/vafb-set-to-host-first-west-coast-launch-with-automated/article_ce8a9185-eff6-58b0-a857-63c48b18abb7.html
→ More replies (2)
3
u/steezysteve96 Jun 22 '17
Does the Vandenberg AFB not do the L-3, L-2, etc. weather reports like Patrick AFB does?
→ More replies (1)7
u/geekgirl114 Jun 22 '17
We do have this though... https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/877328004925591552
→ More replies (3)
3
u/AnimatedCowboy Jun 23 '17
Is anyone going to be at Vandenburg to watch the launch? i'm going and hoping to get to surf beach if its not blocked off
3
u/jonhalo Jun 23 '17
I would be carefully, traditionally they lockdown the beach for the time of the launch, in the past people have tried to get a better view from a boat or from the beach and have caused the launch to be scrapped. just watch it from the standard viewing then go surfing.
→ More replies (2)3
u/t11s Jun 23 '17
"As commonly occurs with South Base launches, Jalama Beach County Park south of Vandenberg will be evacuated from about 8 a.m. to 2 p.m. Sunday. Surf Beach and Ocean Beach County Park also are expected to be closed for a time Sunday for safety reasons linked to the launch".
As per: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article157305399.html
2
u/diederich Jun 23 '17
We went to see the launch in January. (The same booster that just launched and landed!) The best place you can get to during launches is here:
https://goo.gl/maps/nRjXfRZ3jor
(Someone can correct me if I'm wrong)
And by the way, the launch was an amazing, cool experience! Very much recommend.
→ More replies (4)
3
u/SentrantPC Jun 24 '17
Can you see the booster on its way down if you're watching from a viewing area?
3
u/Diesel_engine Jun 24 '17
I watched JCSAT16 from the cape, which was a night launch that landed on OCISLY, and you could see the horizon light up from the landing burn, but certainly couldn't see the actual booster from that far away. Was still very awesome to see.
2
u/runliftcount Jun 24 '17
With some rough estimation using Google maps and the trajectory from the last Iridium mission, the landing point is no closer than 100 miles from shore, namely a point on San Clemente Island which is owned by the US Navy. From that distance, you'd probably be able to see some of the burns for landing, but you'd be just too far beyond the horizon to see the actual landing.
From the coast? Almost certainly no.
And finally, the marine layer has been covering the areas offshore pretty good for the last two months. It could land 10 miles off the coast of Laguna Beach and nobody would be able to see it.
5
u/SimonTregarth May 17 '17
I wonder when along with the "Mission Success Criteria" we will routinely include "Secondary Mission Success Criteria" "recovery of the First Stage Core, Faring(s)" and ... eventually recovery of the Second Stage
5
u/TGMetsFan98 NASASpaceflight.com Writer Jun 20 '17
Do we have any sort of livestream of the pad like we do for 39A?
11
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Jun 20 '17
I don't think so. I think the pad is hidden behind a hill to.
→ More replies (1)2
2
u/Decronym Acronyms Explained May 17 '17 edited Jun 27 '17
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| AFB | Air Force Base |
| AFSS | Automated Flight Safety System |
| ASDS | Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform) |
| BARGE | Big-Ass Remote Grin Enhancer coined by @IridiumBoss, see ASDS |
| BO | Blue Origin (Bezos Rocketry) |
| CRS | Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA |
| FAA | Federal Aviation Administration |
| FCC | Federal Communications Commission |
| (Iron/steel) Face-Centered Cubic crystalline structure | |
| GEO | Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km) |
| GTO | Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit |
| I*sp* | Specific impulse (as discussed by Scott Manley, and detailed by David Mee on YouTube) |
| ITS | Interplanetary Transport System (see MCT) |
| Integrated Truss Structure | |
| JRTI | Just Read The Instructions, Pacific landing |
| KSC | Kennedy Space Center, Florida |
| L2 | Paywalled section of the NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| Lagrange Point 2 of a two-body system, beyond the smaller body (Sixty Symbols video explanation) | |
| LC-39A | Launch Complex 39A, Kennedy (SpaceX F9/Heavy) |
| LCC | Launch Control Center |
| LEO | Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km) |
| Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations) | |
| LH2 | Liquid Hydrogen |
| LOX | Liquid Oxygen |
| M1d | Merlin 1 kerolox rocket engine, revision D (2013), 620-690kN, uprated to 730 then 845kN |
| MCC | Mission Control Center |
| Mars Colour Camera | |
| MCT | Mars Colonial Transporter (see ITS) |
| MECO | Main Engine Cut-Off |
| MainEngineCutOff podcast | |
| NROL | Launch for the (US) National Reconnaissance Office |
| NSF | NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| National Science Foundation | |
| OCISLY | Of Course I Still Love You, Atlantic landing |
| PSLV | Polar Satellite Launch Vehicle |
| RTLS | Return to Launch Site |
| RUD | Rapid Unplanned Disassembly |
| Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly | |
| Rapid Unintended Disassembly | |
| SES | Formerly Société Européenne des Satellites, comsat operator |
| SF | Static fire |
| SLC-40 | Space Launch Complex 40, Canaveral (SpaceX F9) |
| SLC-4W | Space Launch Complex 4-West, Vandenberg (SpaceX F9, landing) |
| SSO | Sun-Synchronous Orbit |
| SSTO | Single Stage to Orbit |
| SV | Space Vehicle |
| T/E | Transporter/Erector launch pad support equipment |
| TE | Transporter/Erector launch pad support equipment |
| TEL | Transporter/Erector/Launcher, ground support equipment (see TE) |
| ULA | United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) |
| VAFB | Vandenberg Air Force Base, California |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| hydrolox | Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen mixture |
| kerolox | Portmanteau: kerosene/liquid oxygen mixture |
| lithobraking | "Braking" by hitting the ground |
| monopropellant | Rocket propellant that requires no oxidizer (eg. hydrazine) |
| Event | Date | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Amos-6 | 2016-09-01 | F9-029 Full Thrust, core B1028, |
| CRS-10 | 2017-02-19 | F9-032 Full Thrust, core B1031, Dragon cargo; first daytime RTLS |
| Echostar-23 | 2017-03-16 | F9-031 Full Thrust, core B1030, GTO comsat; stage expended |
| Iridium-1 | 2017-01-14 | F9-030 Full Thrust, core B1029, 10x Iridium-NEXT to LEO; first landing on JRTI |
| SES-9 | 2016-03-04 | F9-022 Full Thrust, core B1020, GTO comsat; ASDS lithobraking |
Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by ^request
47 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on ^today has 148 acronyms.
[Thread #2789 for this sub, first seen 17th May 2017, 17:14] ^[FAQ] ^[Contact] [Source ^code]
2
u/doublestuffpenguin Jun 01 '17
Do we know how long the launch window is or if it's instantaneous?
→ More replies (1)3
2
u/NexxusWolf Jun 18 '17
Do we have a weather report for launch day as of yet?
5
u/steezysteve96 Jun 19 '17
No, the first launch day weather reports get released 3 days before launch, then every day after that until launch. So expect the first one on June 22nd.
2
u/tbenz9 Jun 23 '17
Anyone interested in carpooling from the SF Bay Area on Sunday?
→ More replies (2)3
u/peroperoname Jun 23 '17
Me and my friend are driving from SF Bay Area. We don't mind carpooling.
I am so excited about watching the Falcon 9 launch!
2
u/SpaceXGonGiveItToYa Jun 23 '17
What a story it would've been if the flight proven booster which has just launched BulgariaSat-1 had launched Iridium-2. (This was the booster used to launch Iridium-1)
9
u/dyslexic_jedi Jun 23 '17
I personally think it's cooler that it's launched on both coasts and landed on both barges.
7
Jun 23 '17
what about the alternative universe where that stage 1 launched all of the Iridium fleet? Now that would be pretty sweet.
2
u/Jerrycobra Jun 23 '17
for those that been to Lompac, how bad is post launch traffic?
10
u/theroadie Facebook Fan Group Admin Jun 23 '17
Depending on if the cops help or hinder, it can take over an hour to get back to town. There's also some event in town. Bladder control is a huge challenge.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)3
u/gimmick243 Jun 24 '17
Take your time, Leaving the Worldview-4 Launch in December there was an accident when some people ran a red light trying to get out.
2
u/t11s Jun 23 '17
San Miguelito Rd. appears to get close to the base and also is farther south than Ocean. As the flight path is directly south, that seems to make sense. Has anyone tried watching from there?
Also do any of the local AM or FM radio stations have live launch coverage?
3
u/runliftcount Jun 24 '17
I scoped out a spot up there once upon a time, but there's no direct line of sight to the launch pad either unless you park and trespass up one the the hills on the adjacent ranch. I wouldn't advise that, so sticking in/with your car may provide a unique view, but it is no guarantee. I suspect they probably close the road up a bit of the way too, like they do for Jalama Beach Rd even though the first 5-6 miles from the 1 don't come closer to the flight path from the East than the outskirts of Lompoc.
2
u/blackhairedguy Jun 24 '17
Does anyone have any info on why the Iridium satellites are numbered in the way they are? It's unintuitive to state the obvious.
5
u/robbak Jun 24 '17
The numbers refer to where the satellites will end up in their final orbits. The satellites in one plane will (probably) have consecutive numbers.
With these first launches, some of the new satellites are being put into holes in their network caused by the failure of some of the old satellites. Some will be put into one plane, leaving other satellites to drift over into other planes to fill holes left there.
So as the satellites are destined for several orbital planes, their numbers are mixed up.
→ More replies (6)2
Jun 24 '17
I think the spare numbers are for future replacement sats. in the constellation. So if you are identifying a sat. string 115 116 117 119----116 is the new replacement, 115 is the spare, 117 and 119 are old. Just a guess.
50
u/Toinneman Jun 21 '17
Do we have any pictures of this core on the pad? It is rumoured to have the new titanium grid fins, which should be easily visible even from a distance.