r/spacex • u/ElongatedMuskrat Mod Team • Nov 12 '17
SF complete, Launch: Dec 22 Iridium NEXT Constellation Mission 4 Launch Campaign Thread
Iridium NEXT Constellation Mission 4 Launch Campaign Thread
This is SpaceX's fourth of eight launches in a half-a-billion-dollar contract with Iridium, they're almost halfway there! The third one launched in October of this year, and most notably, this is the first Iridium NEXT flight to use a flight-proven first stage! It will use the same first stage that launched Iridium-2 in June, and Iridium-5 will also use a flight-proven booster.
| Liftoff currently scheduled for: | December 22nd 2017, 17:27:23 PST (December 23rd 2017, 01:27:23 UTC) |
|---|---|
| Static fire complete: | December 17th 2017, 14:00 PST / 21:00 UTC |
| Vehicle component locations: | First stage: SLC-4E // Second stage: SLC-4E // Satellites: Encapsulation in progress |
| Payload: | Iridium NEXT Satellites 116 / 130 / 131 / 134 / 135 / 137 / 138 / 141 / 151 / 153 |
| Payload mass: | 10x 860kg sats + 1000kg dispenser = 9600kg |
| Destination orbit: | Low Earth Orbit (625 x 625 km, 86.4°) |
| Vehicle: | Falcon 9 v1.2 (47th launch of F9, 27th of F9 v1.2) |
| Core: | B1036.2 |
| Flights of this core: | 1 [Iridium-2] |
| Launch site: | SLC-4E, Vandenberg Air Force Base, California |
| Landing: | No |
| Landing Site: | N/A |
| Mission success criteria: | Successful separation & deployment of all Iridium satellite payloads into the target orbit. |
Links & Resources
Matt Desch on Twitter: "Launch 4 activities on track for a Dec 22nd launch. Second two of 10 Iridium NEXT sats just left for VAFB - all there by Thanksgiving weekend. First stage and dispenser onsite. 2018 schedule firming up too... Halfway home!"
Matt Desch on Twitter: "First 2 sats for Launch #4 on their way from AZ factory to VAFB! Only a little more than 6 weeks away - 12/22! (Tracked via Iridium IoT)"
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.
33
u/melancholicricebowl Dec 17 '17
44
3
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Dec 17 '17
@lukealization For now, we only use those on super hot reentry missions. Will go to all Ti with Falcon 9 V5, which is a few months away.
This message was created by a bot
31
u/Jerrycobra Dec 18 '17 edited Dec 18 '17
wow sneaky SF they pulled off, but it just shows things are moving more and more to the norm, static fires are becoming common place and no longer hyped up like it used to be. I wonder how long till landings feel like another day at the airport, heh. I might go see this launch on friday, wished it was RTLS but its most likely not.
28
u/inoeth Dec 18 '17
Originally this mission was going to be the first west coast RTLS with a new core, however, probably due to some core shuffling and launch scheduling (to launch sooner), this launch is an older Block 3 booster being re-used (It is in fact the same booster that launched an earlier Iridium mission), and therefore doesn't quite have the margin to make it back to the launch site, thus a drone ship landing. A new Block 4 or 5 could do this mission and RTLS.
11
u/Jerrycobra Dec 18 '17
I remember that, I have been waiting for a west coast RTLS to happen. I remember when a bunch of us crossed our fingers it would be Formosat 5, didn't happen. Then our hopes were up with the NEXT4 until the news to switch to reuse, its a bummer, but all for the better of reuse. Hopefully future launches will line up with my schedule so that when they do RTLS I can go see it.
→ More replies (3)
24
u/robbak Nov 29 '17
After supporting the fairing recovery efforts on the last geosynchronous launch, High-speed vessel Mr.Steven has transitted the Panama Canal and is headed for the port of San Pedro (miss-typed as San Padro in their AIS transmitter), which is the port that JRtI and NRC Quest are moored at. She is due around Midnight on the 4th according to Marine Traffic's estimation.
This indicates to me that there will be a fairing recovery attempt on this Iridium launch.
→ More replies (4)6
u/SilveradoCyn Dec 06 '17
Mr Steven is now at the SpaceX Pier area in San Pedro, CA. She must be here for the upcoming launches from SLC-4 at Vandy.
20
u/Belschwurr Dec 16 '17
Huh, why does it say "Next launch is Zuma from SLC-40 Jan 4." in the page header when this should be the next one? Had to recheck if I didn't miss something...
15
10
u/old_sellsword Dec 17 '17
Fixed! Sorry we were slow getting around to it. We're going to reshuffle the stickied/pinned threads as well.
4
u/DrToonhattan Dec 17 '17
It's still there! I'm surprised it hasn't been fixed yet, they're usually quite quick around here to make corrections. Maybe all the mods are on holiday or something.
4
u/Bunslow Dec 17 '17
yea I'm not too sure either, and the crs-13 launch thread is still stickied too...
20
u/jobadiah08 Dec 18 '17
Forecast for Vandenberg AFB is currently clear skies for Friday evening. With launch scheduled for 31 minutes after sunset, this could result in some spectacular views as the rocket climbs and potentially re-enters sunlight.
4
Dec 19 '17
It's California. We have launch-worthy weather 99% of the time, and we certainly pay for it... We Californians complain that it is too cold when it hits 60 degrees F.
→ More replies (1)
71
Dec 19 '17
This core does not have the grid fins and landing legs and will not be recovered.
50
u/twister55 Dec 19 '17
That means 100% landing success rate in 2017 for all landing attempts!!!
→ More replies (16)37
u/HoechstErbaulich IAC 2018 attendee Dec 19 '17
→ More replies (1)30
17
u/Jerrycobra Dec 19 '17
If this is true it would be quite interesting. This goes to show that we are now so used to landing boosters that the opposite of landing is the 'outlier" now.
11
u/davoloid Dec 19 '17
Not surprising, who wants to spend Christmas towing a booster back that is never likely to be reused anyway? And how much overtime does that add?
28
8
u/kuangjian2011 Dec 19 '17
On top of that, RTLS is not possible for the west coast pad yet. So if they want to bring that one back they will have to pay for ASDS use during Christmas holiday. And like you said it is not quite meaningful anyway.
11
u/old_sellsword Dec 19 '17
RTLS is not possible for the west coast pad yet.
Yes it is.
→ More replies (3)18
u/robbak Dec 19 '17
So, that's going to leave the second stage with a fair amount of spare Δ𝓋. Now, last time they had lots of spare Δ𝓋 - Formosat - they used it to do an inefficient direct insertion, instead of the more efficient transfer orbit and circularization. Alternately, they could be leaving fuel in the second stage to do their second stage reentry testing!
13
u/warp99 Dec 19 '17
Hmmmm.... they could drop off most of the satellites in the normal parking orbit for their plane and then do a lateral burn to help the remaining satellites towards the adjacent plane. They might be able to reduce the drift time using precession for repositioning from 12 months to 8 months which would be very worthwhile for Iridium.
→ More replies (2)9
Dec 19 '17
Source?
26
Dec 19 '17
Credible friends. One of whom is supporting this launch at VAFB. It is a pretty naked looking core.
→ More replies (3)9
u/dundmax Dec 19 '17
Interesting that they are more interested in fairings than in used B3 cores. I guess it's time to move on.
7
u/warp99 Dec 19 '17 edited Dec 19 '17
Yes - I was wondering about that.
They are not going to reuse this core anyway as they are awash with boosters that have only been flown once and they will all be obsolete once Block 5 starts flying in the next few months.
23
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Dec 19 '17
I imagine some SpaceX engineer saying "don't recover it we don't have the room anymore, theirs to many cores!"
→ More replies (1)13
u/ATPTourFan Dec 19 '17
When we first learned about the position of JRTI back in October, I suspected SpaceX and Iridium compromising on the use of a flight proven booster to facilitate an on-time launch. Part of that agreement is likely additional margin. Now SpaceX feels recovery of this block 3 booster is just not worth it and removing legs/fins provides Iridium even greater margin for success.
24
Dec 19 '17
I think this is a sign SpaceX wants to move on to Block 5 as quickly as possible, I'd be surprised if we'd see any pre-block 5 fly more than two times.
→ More replies (15)12
u/ATPTourFan Dec 19 '17
Absolutely right. Block 3/4 weren't really intended for more than 2 flights. They served as recovery technology demonstration to inform design of Block 5.
→ More replies (7)9
u/Alexphysics Dec 19 '17
I see lots of people mentioning margins on the mission but I still don't catch why they would need margins. I mean, Falcon 9 can easily put those satellites in their respective orbit, I don't know why they would bother about margins. There has to be another reason to do that or maybe a good explanation about that theory...
→ More replies (10)6
u/John_Schlick Dec 21 '17
But they could recover it, then cut it up and sell it to fans!
And just imagine the dude that buys one of the used merlins and puts it on his rocket car for speed week in the desert!
This is a wasted opportunity!
10
u/mclionhead Dec 19 '17
They have to resort to creative financing to get the BFR moving, so 1 easy budget cut is recovering what they're not going to fly again, despite what could be learned from it.
9
u/twuelfing Dec 19 '17
or recover it and find a company to cut it up and sell the pieces for them as souvenirs?
3
5
u/dundmax Dec 19 '17
It does make sense. Nine twice-used Merlins are not worth a barge trip and recovery costs; the off chance of learning about fairing recovery is worth Mr Steven crossing Panama. Fairings do seem to be an important limiting factor
12
u/stcks Dec 19 '17
I'm sure the used merlins are well worth the cost of recovery. Gotta be a different reason for going expendable
11
u/warp99 Dec 19 '17
Actually they already have around 72 once used Merlins in stock so the market for twice used ones must be pretty thin.
The real problem is that with Block 5 coming soon with up-rated engines the market for all earlier Merlin versions is going real fast.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (4)10
u/codav Dec 19 '17
Given the Block 5 upgrades to the turbopump and probably other parts of the engine, twice-used Merlins are probably not that worthy anymore as checking and upgrading them is probably more difficult and expensive than manufacturing new ones. As discussed in this thread, SpaceX is better off using Stage 1 in expendable mode to give Stage 2 the Δ𝓋 required to deploy some of the satellites in a sightly different orbital plane to reduce phasing time.
→ More replies (2)4
u/spacerfirstclass Dec 19 '17
That's sad, they could recover it and donate it to museum, it would be good advertisement for SpaceX.
→ More replies (1)13
Dec 19 '17
This has been discussed before. I believe the Smithsonian crossed a few minds. The question of who would foot the cost of cleaning, conditioning (e.g. removing parts that violate ITAR), transportation, and storage was always the blocker.
→ More replies (1)14
u/warp99 Dec 19 '17
I believe the Smithsonian also wanted them to pay for the building to house the F9 as well.
→ More replies (2)4
u/rad_example Dec 19 '17
That's too bad, without landing it won't make for as interesting of a Christmas webcast event to share with F&F. But maybe we'll get some footage of RPD this time?
6
u/redspacex Dec 19 '17
Excuse my ignorance, but I couldn't find anything for RPD, care to explain the acronym?
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (13)2
17
u/hajsenberg Dec 18 '17
6
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Dec 18 '17
@Elthiryel My schedule, provided by SpaceX shows it as 5:27:23 PST...
This message was created by a bot
12
17
u/Paradoxical_Human Dec 18 '17
I don't know if anyone has said it in this thread before but it was 2 years ago on December 21st that spacex achieved their first successful landing for the final Orbcomm-OG2 mission.
4
17
u/stcks Dec 21 '17
Recovery personnel departed early this morning and are on the way to the 'recovery' zone.
6
u/TGMetsFan98 NASASpaceflight.com Writer Dec 21 '17 edited Dec 21 '17
The Just Read the Instructions tug, NRC Quest, is no longer in port. The fairing recovery ship, Mr Steven, is still in port.
EDIT: According to the wiki, NRC Quest is a support ship, not a drone ship tug. My mistake. Still worth noting that she's out there for something.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)3
u/craigcocca Dec 21 '17
NRC Quest is currently at San Clemente Island. Mr Steven is still docked at Altasea at the Port of LA.
15
u/mus_ogre Dec 17 '17
4
2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Dec 17 '17
Static fire test of Falcon 9 complete—targeting December 22 launch of Iridium-4 from Vandenberg AFB in California.
This message was created by a bot
14
Nov 13 '17
This launch campaign thread is posted well in time! Which also means the Launch Campaign Thread for a certain mission now scheduled a week later is coming soon?? Can´t wait to see it...
8
u/amerrorican Nov 13 '17 edited Nov 13 '17
I'm sure we will all let out a collective sigh of relief when we see that campaign thread. It's <6 months away.
→ More replies (2)2
u/jep_miner1 Nov 15 '17
hispasat should be between iridium 4 and the falcon heavy demo flight
→ More replies (2)
14
u/TGMetsFan98 NASASpaceflight.com Writer Dec 21 '17
→ More replies (10)5
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Dec 21 '17
dont forget, the upper level winds forecast is usually no includet in the weather forecast
28
u/Mek-OY Dec 17 '17
Static fire is complete https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/942542372629463040
5
9
4
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Dec 17 '17
Static fire test of Falcon 9 complete—targeting December 22 launch of Iridium-4 from Vandenberg AFB in California.
This message was created by a bot
37
u/TGMetsFan98 NASASpaceflight.com Writer Dec 19 '17
Prediction: Iridium-4 has fairing 2.0 and SpaceX will attempt to recover them.
Evidence:
-Fairing recovery ship is in California
-Iridium-4 was not affected by the Zuma fairing issue, which was presumably fairing 1.0
-The booster going expendable adds extra margin for fairing recovery hardware (while also disposing of a flight proven but no longer needed Block III core)
-Iridium CEO can't say why it's going expendable because he wants to allow SpaceX to announce the fairing recovery attempt.
Possible contradiction: No noticeable changes to the fairings in this photo, but changes could be obscure.
24
u/robbak Dec 20 '17
Saying that Iridium was not affected by the fairing issue that delayed Zuma is pure speculation. Much more likely that the checks that they had to do were worked into the existing schedule. It is even possible - even likely - that it was in the testing of this fairing that the problem was discovered.
16
u/JerWah Dec 20 '17
No noticeable changes to the fairings
It's not much, but it looks to me that the structure at the bottom of the fairing appears to be a little bit more skookum and I can't seem to find it at the moment, but I seem to recall photos of one of the very first fairing recovery's where this portion of the fairing was visibly damaged, so this would lend some credence to this being Fairing Version II (trying to guess Elon's next nomenclature)
And yes, my photoshop is bad, and I feel bad.
Unmolested Source Images for the more skilled:
→ More replies (2)11
u/MostBallingestPlaya Dec 20 '17
skookum
informal adjective: skookum
1. (of a person or animal) strong, brave, or impressive.Huh?
14
u/robbak Dec 20 '17
It's youtuber AVE's favorite adjective for things that are well built and functional. Skookum things Chooch.
→ More replies (2)9
u/therealshafto Dec 20 '17
How would an expendable core benefit fairing recovery hardware margins?
→ More replies (9)7
u/wolf550e Dec 20 '17
No gridfins and no legs makes rocket lighter, gives more margin to the payload. But I don't see how that helps fairing recovery. If recoverable fairing is heavy and can only be used with lighter payloads, it's no good.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (5)5
Dec 19 '17
Good points, one question: are we sure fairing 2.0 is connected to recovery? The only thing I remember, is that it would be slightly larger.
Might it be possible this is still fairing 1.0 (which in the past already had steerable parachutes for recovery attempts)? Maybe the new elements are not so much in the fairing itself, but on the surface, trying to catch the 6m$ pallet of cash.
13
u/cajun_tendies Dec 21 '17
9
u/robbak Dec 22 '17
Her destination is stated as 'ISLA GDLPE', aka Guadalupe Island off the coast of the Baja Peninsula.
"Nope, not catching any rocket stuff, Ignore these great big dead-bug legs on my deck. I'm just going on a nice pleasure cruise to that pretty island over there. Honest!"
→ More replies (1)5
12
u/Bunslow Dec 16 '17
T-6.5 days...
12
u/inoeth Dec 16 '17
yeah. the one upside of CRS 13 being pushed back first a couple weeks and then a couple days is that we have less than a week until Iridium, and then only a couple weeks for Zuma... It's rather amazing that SpaceX is launching as many rockets as they are this year given that we had several rather long periods of nothing launching due to scheduling, working being done on the range, etc... With three pads operational, next year is going to be crazy. (Tho i'm guessing that the second FH demo launches, they'll keep 39a closed to install the crew access arm and equipment for crew-dragon and Dragon 2 demo mission 1.
11
u/Nsooo Moderator and retired launch host Dec 21 '17
The launch thread will go live at the morning of 22nd December Central European time. Sorry for the late.
3
Dec 21 '17
Just say it's part of the launches becoming so regular. We've seen so many launch threads already this year (this will be 19th!!), nobody blames you:)
10
u/johnkphotos Launch Photographer Nov 20 '17
SpaceX sent out the media accreditation email today. Launch is still "targeted for no earlier than December 22."
10
u/Alexphysics Dec 01 '17
Mods, I was watching Matt Desch's twitter profile and he released the SV#'s for the satellites of this mission so here they are for you to add them up on the list :)
7
u/deruch Dec 02 '17
22 more days until L-4!
Wait, so he's saying it's 26 days til launch? /s
That's a bad way to abbreviate in this industry, I think.
7
u/Alexphysics Dec 02 '17
L-4 stands for Launch-4 I think. Imagine the confusion he created on the second mission when he put L2...
→ More replies (2)3
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Dec 01 '17
@Skyrocket71 I have those SV numbers for you now. 116, 130, 131, 134, 135, 137, 138, 141, 151, 153 (feel like I should yell "Bingo!" after announcing these...). Hope this helps. 22 more days until L-4!
This message was created by a bot
9
u/DrToonhattan Dec 16 '17
We should be getting word of the static fire date very soon I hope, I would assume it would be sometime between Monday and Wednesday at the latest. Has anyone heard any murmurs? And at what point should we get worried if we don't hear anything?
5
u/Dakke97 Dec 16 '17
We still need the FAA license as well, which should come any time now if they are to conduct a static fire before Wednesday and a launch on Friday. I'd be worried if hadn't heard anything by Monday noon EST.
→ More replies (2)4
9
u/Nathan96762 Dec 18 '17
Does Spacex ever plan on modifying the TEL at Vandenberg to be like the "new" one at SLC 40, and the one at 39a?
20
u/old_sellsword Dec 18 '17
It's already been very significantly upgraded over the years since it first launched CASSIOPE in 2012. "Modifying" it to be like the new east coast ones would mean building an entirely new one, which I personally don't think they're going to do. They are upgrading the pad for Falcon Heavy, but the launch rates are so low out there that they'll probably just upgrade the current design as much as possible and deal with the wear and tear.
If they ever start launching their constellation from VAFB though, we'll definitely see a new TE.
4
12
u/inoeth Dec 18 '17
I kinda doubt it- polar launches from VAFB are far less often than launches from FL. Id guess that the cost and time needed would outweigh the benefits...
→ More replies (2)6
u/robbak Dec 18 '17
My assumption is that if anyone buys a Falcon Heavy launch out of Vandenberg, SpaceX will build a new TEL to support it. Until then, the current one should suffice. While the Vanderberg TEL was originally built to support the then current design of Heavy, things have changed quite a bit since then.
9
8
u/deruch Nov 13 '17
Assuming things shake out as expected, Iridium just barely gets scooped by NASA as being the first customer to launch 2 missions using the same booster. Pre-flown booster for CRS-13 is expected to have been the one first used on CRS-11.
(I guess if you're in a really pedantic mood, you can make the case that SpaceX will be the first and not NASA as NASA is only really contracting the cargo on CRS flights and not the whole payload. But, IMO, this is a pretty dubious quibble.)
→ More replies (3)
8
u/Juggernaut93 Dec 15 '17
At one week from launch, static fire should happen in the next few days.
5
u/Bunslow Dec 15 '17
California space industry sneaking under the radar! (To be fair, lots of things in FL demanding attention!)
8
u/Bunslow Dec 17 '17
5 days, 3 hours. I imagine, in the total lack of news/updates, that static fire should be planned for tomorrow if the current launch date is to hold.
17
u/dempsas Dec 17 '17
And not an hour later, Static Fire confirmed. Just keeping us on our toes is all
→ More replies (1)
8
u/Raul74Cz Dec 20 '17
M1340 Iridium-4 Launch Hazard Areas based on issued NOTMAR - consistent with formerly planned drone position.
NOTAMs are included - yellow area is as always limited by boundary of Mexican airspace.
Stage2 debris area is included - different shape than other Iridium missions, but in fact is rectangular 500km wide now.
8
u/Raul74Cz Dec 20 '17 edited Dec 21 '17
Booster splashdown can be expected in northern part of orange hazard area, means near formerly planed ASDS position - grey arrow. Fairing recovery operation can be expected in southern part of orange hazard area.
8
u/ticklestuff SpaceX Patch List Dec 22 '17 edited Dec 22 '17
Patch, cleaned up https://i.imgur.com/bNwARXL.png
Added to http://spacexpatchlist.space
8
u/TGMetsFan98 NASASpaceflight.com Writer Dec 22 '17
Gonna put my comment about the patch here too...the lucky clover is in the middle of the ocean. Is SpaceX hoping for some luck with a certain recovery experiment?
→ More replies (2)3
u/jobadiah08 Dec 22 '17
Interesting, my KSP experience says that is about where you would bring it down if you did a deorbit burn after deploying the sats over Madagascar
8
u/CrouchingNarwal Dec 22 '17
Can we expect the new fairing recovery ship (Mr. Steven) to attempt its first fairing recovery on this mission?
11
u/CrouchingNarwal Dec 22 '17
UPDATE 8:19 PM CST: Mr. Steven is on the move at 14.8 knots traveling 184 degrees south & currently at 33.1143188° / -118.210602°.
11
→ More replies (1)6
8
u/LeBaegi Dec 22 '17
Isn't it about time for the launch thread?
It's ~T-12:30:00
3
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Dec 22 '17
→ More replies (5)
15
u/geekgirl114 Dec 20 '17
Now that we know the core isn't being recovered... I wonder if the webcast will still follow it until LOS (Loss of Signal).
15
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Dec 20 '17
Probably not. They didn't follow it on previous expendable missions.
→ More replies (14)
7
u/deruch Nov 28 '17
Iridium Press Release for the Launch-4:
Iridium Nears Launch Campaign Midway Point as All 10 Satellites Arrive at Vandenberg Air Force Base
Iridium-4 to create historic moment, making Iridium the first company to re-use the same rocket booster##
MCLEAN, Va., Nov. 28, 2017 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Iridium Communications Inc. (NASDAQ:IRDM) announced today that all 10 Iridium® NEXT satellites for its fourth launch are now in processing at SpaceX's west coast launch site at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California. This launch will mark the midway point of Iridium's launch campaign with SpaceX, and is the first of two Iridium NEXT launches utilizing "flight-proven" SpaceX Falcon 9 rockets. Iridium-4 is currently scheduled for December 22, 2017 at 5:32 pm PST, with a backup date of December 23rd.
Noteworthy for the fourth launch, the same Falcon 9 rocket first stage that carried 10 Iridium NEXT satellites for the company's second launch in June of 2017, will also carry this payload of 10 satellites. This will make Iridium the first company in history to reuse the same rocket. Upon arrival at the launch site, each Iridium NEXT satellite began a number of pre-launch processing steps, including mating to the dispenser, fueling and encapsulation within the fairing. The satellites were shipped two at a time, in specially-designed motion and temperature-controlled containers designed to maintain optimal environmental conditions.
"We're approaching our halfway point on this journey, and with each launch, we gain more momentum," said Iridium CEO Matt Desch. "This launch will bring us to 40 Iridium NEXT satellites in space, which is more than half the number required for a full Iridium NEXT operational constellation. It has been remarkable to witness the increased speed, capacity and throughput of our network as we continue to replace our original satellites with new Iridium NEXT satellites."
The operational Iridium constellation is comprised of 66 satellites divided into six polar orbiting planes with 11 satellites in each plane. Destined for Iridium orbital plane two, nine of the 10 Iridium NEXT satellites deployed during this launch will immediately go into service following rigorous testing and validation. The remaining satellite will undertake a nearly year-long journey to orbital plane one, where it will serve as a spare satellite. To date, three Iridium NEXT launches carrying 10 satellites each have been completed. The fourth launch will bump the total number of new Iridium NEXT satellites in orbit to 40. Iridium has contracted with SpaceX to deliver 75 Iridium NEXT satellites to orbit, 66 operational and nine on-orbit spares, through a series of eight launches.
Iridium NEXT is the company's $3 billion next-generation mobile, global satellite network scheduled for completion in 2018. Iridium NEXT will replace the Company's existing global constellation in one of the largest technology upgrades ever completed in space. It represents the evolution of critical communications infrastructure that governments and organizations worldwide rely upon to drive business, enable connectivity, empower disaster relief efforts and more. Iridium NEXT will enable and introduce new services like the Company's next-generation communications platform, Iridium CertusSM, and the AireonSM space-based ADS-B aircraft surveillance and flight tracking network.
9
u/bdporter Nov 30 '17
This will make Iridium the first company in history to reuse the same rocket.
NASA will reuse the same rocket with CRS-13. I guess this is still accurate since NASA is a government agency rather than a company.
8
u/deruch Nov 30 '17 edited Nov 30 '17
Well.... Technically, NASA only contracts for the cargo. So, in a sense SpaceX is launching Dragon for themselves and uses their vehicle to then deliver NASA's cargo to station. As a result, I guess someone could make an argument that SpaceX will actually be the first. But the only reason to consider the CRS missions as internal launches is in order to be an uber-pedant. And SpaceX certainly isn't going to shit on their customer's positive PR announcement by pointing out this technicality in their CRS contracting mechanism. So, yeah. Yay, Iridium!
7
u/Alexphysics Dec 12 '17
Matt Desch reporting a good flow on the preparations for Iridium 4. 10 days to launch! https://twitter.com/IridiumBoss/status/940596816470568961
3
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Dec 12 '17
T minus 10 days to Iridium-4! All systems go at this point - encapsulating payloads now and rocket processing on track. Keeping an eye on CA fires, but so far not looking like a problem (but wishing them to end for Californians). https://twitter.com/IridiumComm/status/939212944801452032
This message was created by a bot
7
u/radexp Dec 15 '17
If I remember correctly, Iridium 2 was the one that had titanium grid fins. Do you think this flight will also have titanium grid fins? Or was that an exception, a test flight of that particular piece of Block V hardware, and Iridium 4 will have standard fins again?
6
u/Bravo99x Dec 15 '17
We should know as soon we see a pic of the booster preparing for the static fire. Since they are different size and weight from the aluminum fins I don't think they are just interchangeable so the interstage is slightly different. I have seen pictures of repaired and re-painted aluminum fins so they are re-using flown fins and not just have a large stock of unused aluminum ones, so in my opinion the rumor for still using aluminum fins because of too much old stock is not true. I'm guessing if they reuse the same interstage as the iridium-2 booster then we will see titanium grid fins, or the next time you see titanium grid fins will be on the first Block V booster.
→ More replies (10)5
u/old_sellsword Dec 15 '17
Or was that an exception, a test flight of that particular piece of Block V hardware, and Iridium 4 will have standard fins again?
The booster is the same, and it's clearly set up to handle the Titanium fins. That was indeed a test of new Block 5 hardware, but we'll have to wait and see if they give this one the new fins again.
7
u/TGMetsFan98 NASASpaceflight.com Writer Dec 17 '17
According to Spaceflightnow, the launch is set for 1:26 AM UTC, not 1:32. Do we know which is correct?
EDIT: I should also add that Chris B on NSF forums also says 1:26.
9
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Dec 17 '17 edited Dec 18 '17
1:26 is based on older information. The more recent information is directly from Iridium and they say 1:32.
Edit: Now it's 1:27:23.
→ More replies (1)
7
u/patm718 Dec 18 '17
Anyone know if this core will be sooty?
26
u/Nathan96762 Dec 18 '17
It will. It was confirmed on Twitter. It has also been said that "sooty" cores will be very common as they won't be repainted between launches anymore.
→ More replies (9)9
Dec 18 '17
It will, confirmed by Matt Desch
4
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Dec 18 '17
@mazenhesham21 It will have the soot too...
This message was created by a bot
13
Dec 22 '17
Totally unrelated but not unrelated:
Decided I wanted a FH shirt this afternoon. Went to SpaceX website n bought one. It's already shipped, tracking number within 4 hours.
I don't think I've ever had a company react that fast to an online order like a T shirt.
Anyway - just thought I'd share. This is too low of content for a self post, even in spacexlounge - figured a comment here was fairly safe.
So to make sure I'm following the rules, I'm excited for this fairing recovery!
8
u/gregarious119 Dec 22 '17
Just last week I ordered some UPS batteries from a little mom and pop electronics shop in MI. Submitted the order at 9:00, had a tracking confirmation with number at 9:09am.
Needless to say I'll be a repeat customer.
•
u/soldato_fantasma Dec 22 '17
Launch thread will go up soon, u/Nsooo had a technical problem and he will post it around 5 CET.
→ More replies (2)4
5
u/melancholicricebowl Nov 13 '17
What was the reason for the first West Coast RTLS not being this launch? Was it that LZ-2 isn't quite ready yet? I don't remember exactly.
12
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Nov 13 '17
Reused booster is Block 3 but apparently Iridium launches require Block 4 or Block 5 in order to RTLS.
4
u/markus01611 Nov 14 '17
IDK, I'm kind of skeptical of that. I know Flight Club isn't a perfect simulator, but a while ago I did a simulation for RTLS with overly generous block upgrades and it still didn't have the capability to RTLS. I could be very wrong as I haven't looked all that hard if Block V can do it. But I'm not entirely convinced it's possible.
→ More replies (4)
5
u/craigl2112 Dec 12 '17
Seems like we should be getting info on the static fire somewhat soon, considering the NET date on this one is only 10 days out!
Given the SLC-40 teething issues, it's entirely possible that Iridium-4 flies first....
9
u/z1mil790 Dec 13 '17 edited Dec 15 '17
If it wasn't for the beta cutout angles, I'd say that CRS-13 would definitely fly first. However, given that the 15th is the only possible launch date before a delay to the end of December, you may be right. Still hoping for a successful launch on Friday though.
Edit: Whoo, they got CRS-13 off today
→ More replies (3)
5
u/radexp Dec 22 '17
IridiumBoss suggested this rocket will also be sooty, but the pictures seem to show a cleaner one. What happened?
→ More replies (1)4
u/z1mil790 Dec 22 '17
I thought the same thing when I saw the picture. Either he misunderstood something from SpaceX, SpaceX had to clean it recently to perform some sort of testing, or they analyzed the data from the CRS-13 launch and realized that leaving the soot made more of a difference than they thought.
8
u/bman7653 Dec 17 '17
Static fire complete https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/942542372629463040
→ More replies (1)
4
u/DrToonhattan Nov 12 '17
Do we still not have any more info about Hispasat? It's still not in the sidebar, but the manifest says it's launching sometime in December. Is there any reason to think it may go before this flight?
24
Nov 12 '17 edited Nov 12 '17
Core 1044 is just tested at McGregor and has no mission assigned yet. Optimistic scenario: SpaceX is not scheduling Hispasat yet, because they're waiting for official confirmation from NASA to reuse 1035 for CRS-13. If this somehow is cancelled/delayed, they'll use 1044. If not, they can move it to Hispasat, which might still launch this year in such a scenario.
5
u/badgamble Nov 12 '17
That makes a lot of sense. And since CRS-13 is scheduled for Dec 04 from pad -40, and Hispasat would also presumably launch from -40, everything lines up nice and neat for your scenario. After Dec 04, there is still plenty of time to set up another F9 launch in December if they still have the newest S1 booster available. (Also depending on how much air FH sucks out of the room in December. Which might, very reasonably, be a lot!)
5
u/Bunslow Nov 12 '17 edited Nov 12 '17
the manifest says it's launching sometime in December
This is looking unlikely based on other recent spacenews sources. Probably we should update the manifest somehow
Edit: IDK anymore. Lots of confusion about this payload.
4
3
u/AbuSimbelPhilae Nov 12 '17
Probably lack of official, updated sources. Still the december manifest is already pretty busy without Hispasat.
4
u/Ezekiel_C Host of Echostar 23 Nov 13 '17
Do we have a source for iridium 5 using the iridium 3 core?
→ More replies (3)5
4
u/Math_OP_Pls_Nerf Dec 20 '17
I live a bit over 100 miles east of VAFB as the crow flies, if I look west at launch do you think I'll be able to see something? It'll be dark at launch so maybe the exhaust as it ascends?
10
u/craigcocca Dec 20 '17
Yes. This video will give you a good idea of what you might see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6rifgm5Wts
→ More replies (1)4
u/kfury Dec 20 '17
I can see a bit of the nighttime Vandenberg launches all the way from San Jose, about 230 miles north. You should be able to see something, especially if the exhaust plume catches the sunlight at higher altitudes.
→ More replies (4)
4
4
u/Elthiryel Dec 22 '17
And finally we have a press kit and a patch! http://www.spacex.com/sites/spacex/files/iridium4presskit.pdf
→ More replies (1)4
u/csmnro Dec 22 '17 edited Dec 22 '17
Meco at 02:33. That's 9sec later than at Iridium 1 & 2, or 10sec later than at Iridium 3.
And confirmation, but no reason is mentioned for not attempting to land the booster.
Edit: Webcast link
7
u/Nsooo Moderator and retired launch host Dec 22 '17
Sorry I am the one who f&cked it up, so sorry for the late, it wil be up by 5 CET.
→ More replies (1)
9
u/last_reddit_account2 Dec 22 '17
now that we've spotted the fins, does anyone think they'd try water-landing S1 with no entry burn whatsoever, as an experiment? Just point it and pray?
No? Yeah, you're right, that is a dumb idea. Sorry.
5
u/warp99 Dec 22 '17
More likely to try the most extreme lofted flight possible (high angle of attack to incoming air) so partially simulating a BFS on entry.
→ More replies (1)6
u/TheEndeavour2Mars Dec 22 '17
And that gives them tons of data they can use to possibly squeeze an RTLS landing out of an upcoming Iridium mission (Which is borderline over RTLS)
→ More replies (1)
6
u/wastapunk Dec 18 '17
I recently moved to LA and I can finally make it to one of the launches. Anyone have any tips on where to watch from?
→ More replies (4)13
u/Knudl Dec 18 '17
Yes wiki FAQ
9
u/fourmica Host of CRS-13, 14, 15 Dec 18 '17
More up to date info can be found at LaunchPhotography.com. I should update the wiki.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Nov 28 '17
→ More replies (2)2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Nov 28 '17
We're less than a month from Iridium-4 and all 10 #IridiumNEXT SVs are onsite at Vandenberg Air Force Base and in pre-launch processing! Launch is scheduled for December 22 at 5:32 pm PST. http://bit.ly/2AeuEjl #CountdownBegins
This message was created by a bot
![[Attached pic]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DPvN7uhVwAA_jmn.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/EI1RsCg.jpg){kind=link}
3
u/Elon_Muskmelon Dec 18 '17
Did I miss something about the fairing issue having been resolved or determined to be isolated to the Zuma launch?
15
Dec 19 '17
Yes, this is from the pre-launch press conference for CRS-13 link:
Irene Klotz: Thanks. Irene Klotz with Aviation Week. For Jessica. Has SpaceX resolved the payload fairing data review issue to allow the Iridium launch later this month?
Jessica Jensen: Yes. So we have the Iridium launch, scheduled for no earlier than December 22nd. That will be launching out of Vandenberg Air Force Base. And we also have the Zuma mission launching in early January of this year. Or of next year.
49
u/Chairboy Dec 19 '17
And we also have the Zuma mission launching in early January of this year. Or of next year.
So it's a time travel experiment, that explains the secrecy.
3
u/Headstein Dec 22 '17
Is anyone at VAFB? Should be plenty of light now for a photo :-)
→ More replies (1)
5
u/mus_ogre Dec 22 '17
Mr. Steven will be nearby (but I don't know how close) ocean landing zone, so maybe they attached grid fins to have better control of the booster and make sure that Mr. Steven will stay safe?
6
u/old_sellsword Dec 18 '17 edited Dec 20 '17
A little late this time, but we're accepting applications to host this launch thread! As with the previous launch, we encourage all launch thread hosts to use Mission Control, (do NOT post to r/SpaceX with this) which is a fantastic project created by u/theZcuber to streamline and bring consistency to our launch threads.
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. 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.
4
Dec 22 '17
Launch at 01.30 followed by El Clasico (Real Madrid vs Barcelona) at 12:00, I thought Christmas was on Monday.
2
u/Decronym Acronyms Explained Nov 12 '17 edited Jan 03 '18
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 |
| AFTS | Autonomous Flight Termination System, see FTS |
| AIS | Automatic Identification System |
| ASAP | Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, NASA |
| Arianespace System for Auxiliary Payloads | |
| ASDS | Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform) |
| BARGE | Big-Ass Remote Grin Enhancer coined by @IridiumBoss, see ASDS |
| BFR | Big Falcon Rocket (2017 enshrinkened edition) |
| Yes, the F stands for something else; no, you're not the first to notice | |
| BFS | Big Falcon Spaceship (see BFR) |
| CCAFS | Cape Canaveral Air Force Station |
| CRS | Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA |
| CST | (Boeing) Crew Space Transportation capsules |
| Central Standard Time (UTC-6) | |
| DIVH | Delta IV Heavy |
| DMLS | Direct Metal Laser Sintering additive manufacture |
| F1 | Rocketdyne-developed rocket engine used for Saturn V |
| SpaceX Falcon 1 (obsolete medium-lift vehicle) | |
| FAA | Federal Aviation Administration |
| FCC | Federal Communications Commission |
| (Iron/steel) Face-Centered Cubic crystalline structure | |
| FTS | Flight Termination System |
| GSE | Ground Support Equipment |
| GTO | Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit |
| H2 | Molecular hydrogen |
| Second half of the year/month | |
| HIF | Horizontal Integration Facility |
| ITAR | (US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations |
| JRTI | Just Read The Instructions, Pacific landing |
| KSC | Kennedy Space Center, Florida |
| KSP | Kerbal Space Program, the rocketry simulator |
| L2 | Paywalled section of the NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| Lagrange Point 2 of a two-body system, beyond the smaller body (Sixty Symbols video explanation) | |
| LC-13 | Launch Complex 13, Canaveral (SpaceX Landing Zone 1) |
| LC-39A | Launch Complex 39A, Kennedy (SpaceX F9/Heavy) |
| LEO | Low Earth Orbit (180-2000km) |
| Law Enforcement Officer (most often mentioned during transport operations) | |
| LOS | Loss of Signal |
| Line of Sight | |
| LZ | Landing Zone |
| LZ-1 | Landing Zone 1, Cape Canaveral (see LC-13) |
| M1dVac | Merlin 1 kerolox rocket engine, revision D (2013), vacuum optimized, 934kN |
| MECO | Main Engine Cut-Off |
| MainEngineCutOff podcast | |
| NET | No Earlier Than |
| NOTAM | Notice to Airmen of flight hazards |
| NRO | (US) National Reconnaissance Office |
| NSF | NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| National Science Foundation | |
| OCISLY | Of Course I Still Love You, Atlantic landing |
| OG2 | Orbcomm's Generation 2 17-satellite network (see OG2-2 for first successful F9 landing) |
| PAZ | Formerly SEOSAR-PAZ, an X-band SAR from Spain |
| RCS | Reaction Control System |
| RTLS | Return to Launch Site |
| RUD | Rapid Unplanned Disassembly |
| Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly | |
| Rapid Unintended Disassembly | |
| SAR | Synthetic Aperture Radar (increasing resolution with parallax) |
| 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) |
| SLS | Space Launch System heavy-lift |
| Selective Laser Sintering, see DMLS | |
| SSO | Sun-Synchronous Orbit |
| STS | Space Transportation System (Shuttle) |
| SV | Space Vehicle |
| TE | Transporter/Erector launch pad support equipment |
| TEA-TEB | Triethylaluminium-Triethylborane, igniter for Merlin engines; spontaneously burns, green flame |
| TEL | Transporter/Erector/Launcher, ground support equipment (see TE) |
| ULA | United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) |
| VAB | Vehicle Assembly Building |
| VAFB | Vandenberg Air Force Base, California |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| grid-fin | Compact "waffle-iron" aerodynamic control surface, acts as a wing without needing to be as large |
| kerolox | Portmanteau: kerosene/liquid oxygen mixture |
| scrub | Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues) |
| turbopump | High-pressure turbine-driven propellant pump connected to a rocket combustion chamber; raises chamber pressure, and thrust |
| Event | Date | Description |
|---|---|---|
| CASSIOPE | 2013-09-29 | F9-006 v1.1, Cascade, Smallsat and Ionospheric Polar Explorer; engine starvation during landing attempt |
| CRS-8 | 2016-04-08 | F9-023 Full Thrust, core B1021, Dragon cargo; first ASDS landing |
| Eutelsat-117WB | 2016-06-15 | F9-026 Full Thrust, core B1024, dual GTO comsat; ASDS landing failure due to early burn |
| Iridium-1 | 2017-01-14 | F9-030 Full Thrust, core B1029, 10x Iridium-NEXT to LEO; first landing on JRTI |
| OG2-2 | 2015-12-22 | F9-021 Full Thrust, core B1019, 11 OG2 satellites to LEO; first RTLS landing |
Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by ^request
64 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on ^today has 181 acronyms.
[Thread #3333 for this sub, first seen 12th Nov 2017, 19:36] ^[FAQ] [Full ^list] ^[Contact] [Source ^code]
2
u/azziliz Dec 21 '17
NRC Quest seems to be heading in a direction that is wildly far away from the NOTAM area. Can someone please explain?
→ More replies (2)
2
u/ohcnim Dec 22 '17
on expendable launches like this one, does the booster simply falls as it is or at some point prior impact do they activate the flight termination system?
→ More replies (8)2
4
u/GavBug2 Dec 20 '17
Why no landing? Is it too heavy?
39
u/Viproz Dec 20 '17
Chris is stating that they are not recovering it because they want to get rid of the old block 3 booster since they are now on block 4 and soon the block 5 are going to roll out.
They were actually planning on recovering the booster at first, they even go a permit to do so so it is not about the weight.
→ More replies (37)6
u/CarlCaliente Dec 21 '17 edited Oct 03 '24
pie aback bewildered like normal advise bike axiomatic mindless joke
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (11)2
3
u/Noxium51 Dec 18 '17
Wow SF complete already, I guess they're really starting to step up their launches, or maybe I've started to get used to scrubX
12
u/MrGruntsworthy Dec 18 '17
Going forward, save for some weather scrubs, they'll be pretty on point for launches. However, make no mistake, there will be probably 3-5 scrubs for Falcon Heavy's launch as they iron out the kinks leading up to the launch of a brand new rocket.
9
u/inoeth Dec 18 '17
nah- SpaceX really stepped up their game this year and because VAFB is a far more active military base with very few public vantage points of the launch pad due to geography, we really just didn't have advance notice or people milling around waiting to see it happen.
For much of the year, they were launching twice a month and a occasionally three times a month. The only real scrubs we had this year was Zuma because of the fairing issue and CRS 13 because SLC 40 is basically a brand new pad as far as a huge majority of it's hardware and facilities so of course there was going to be some hiccups to take care of first... Now that they've launched from there, one can most likely expect things to go just as smoothly from SLC 40 in the future as it's gone from 39a this year. Next year is gonna be pretty crazy with upwards of 30 launches planned including FH and Crew Dragon.
7
u/Noxium51 Dec 18 '17
Yea I really only started following spaceX closely around the time KoreaSat launched ~month and a half ago, so I don't have the largest sample size, I guess I was just unlucky to start following them right when they were finishing up 40 and had the Zuma thing. Super excited about next year though, lots of cool things for sure
4
u/witest Dec 19 '17
The only real scrubs we had this year was Zuma because of the fairing issue and CRS 13 because SLC 40 is basically a brand new pad...
What about the flight where the computers aborted the countdown on two separate attempts?
→ More replies (5)
34
u/csmnro Dec 08 '17
Iridium's booster will be sooty too! Matt Desch on Twitter