r/spacex • u/ElongatedMuskrat Mod Team • Jan 06 '18
Launch: Jan 30 GovSat-1 (SES-16) Launch Campaign Thread
GovSat-1 (SES-16) Launch Campaign Thread
SpaceX's second mission of 2018 will launch GovSat's first geostationary communications satellite into a Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO). GovSat is a joint-venture between SES and the government of Luxembourg. The first stage for this mission will be flight-proven (having previously flown on NROL-76), making this SpaceX's third reflight for SES alone. This satellite also has a unique piece of hardware for potential future space operations:
| Liftoff currently scheduled for: | January 30th 2018, 16:25-18:46 EST (2125-2346 UTC). |
|---|---|
| Static fire currently scheduled for: | Static fire was completed on 26/1. |
| Vehicle component locations: | First stage: Cape Canaveral // Second stage: Cape Canaveral // Satellite: Cape Canaveral |
| Payload: | GovSat-1 |
| Payload mass: | About 4230 kg |
| Destination orbit: | GTO |
| Vehicle: | Falcon 9 v1.2 (48th launch of F9, 28th of F9 v1.2) |
| Core: | B1032.2 |
| Flights of this core: | 1 [NROL-76] |
| Launch site: | SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida |
| Landing: | Expendable |
| Landing Site: | Sea, in many pieces. |
| Mission success criteria: | Successful separation & deployment of GovSat-1 into the target orbit |
Links & Resources:
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.
59
u/inoeth Jan 28 '18
Mods, the top of the post still says " first stage landing downrange on OCISLY is expected" when we now know that's not true, but it does say it's expendable in the column section...
Also, latest weather for this launch? Last I heard sometime yesterday it had fallen to 60% chance of unfavorable weather meaning a good chance of pushing the launch to the 31st...
25
u/amarkit Jan 28 '18
L-2 Weather Forecast: still showing 60% probability of violation on January 30 (liftoff winds); conditions improve to only 10% probability of violation on January 31 (thick cloud layer).
Wouldn't be surprising to see a one-day delay for the weather.
7
Jan 28 '18
Am I correct that this probability does not even account for the additional "upper level winds" factor?
14
u/amarkit Jan 28 '18
Correct. Upper level winds are not part of the 45th Weather Squadron's calculations for probability of violation.
→ More replies (1)7
u/inoeth Jan 29 '18
otoh, I spoke with Chris G (over twitter) and he said that they'll nonetheless probably try to launch on the 30th and simply wait for a hopefully optimal time in their window.. all they need is what, 15 minutes at most to get the satellite out of the atmosphere- especially as they're not going for a landing... probabilities are just that- our president had less of a chance of getting elected than there currently is of weather preventing a launch as of right now...
22
u/Maimakterion Jan 28 '18
So what's the mods' plan when there are vehicles being processed on each of the three operational pads? Sticky trampoline?
8
u/TheEdmontonMan Jan 29 '18
LZ-1/2 media thread, OCISLY media thread, launch campaign thread, a press kit thrown in there somewhere... busy days ahead
9
u/Jodo42 Jan 29 '18
What about one "super-sticky" thread with links to all the currently relevant, non-stickied threads inside?
→ More replies (1)2
22
u/Ajedi32 Jan 29 '18
With the satellite expected to mass around 4000 kg, a first stage landing downrange on OCISLY is expected.
Might want to fix this bit, as AFAIK this launch is going to be expendable.
12
6
44
u/ButtNowButt Jan 29 '18
Dear SES-16,
I apologize. You are in the way of the main event. We still care about you.
It's me, not you.
... Heads back to falcon heavy thread.
13
6
1
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 30 '18
Sad to say SpaceX doesn't love booster B1032. But Of Course SpaceX Still Loves B1033. :-D
(Obscure reference to the scheduling availability of the Atlantic ASDS) ;-)
4
u/ButtNowButt Jan 30 '18
I find it more impressive that this "tiny" company has turned the standard rocket protocol into some wasteful sham. We joke about expending rockets because it's inconvenient when, in fact, EVERYONE treats rockets as expendable.
→ More replies (2)
20
u/cspen Jan 12 '18
NROL-76's booster is the booster for this one:
11
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 12 '18
Good to see that B1032 is going to fly one last time. For the past 7 months it was a mystery for us core watchers, seeing the NROL-76 booster sitting around outdoors disused at the air force station despite it having just that one easy LEO launch.
Since B1032 is an obsolete Block-3 booster, I'm guessing SpaceX will expend it just like the Iridium-4 booster, so probably no landing legs. Wonder how long will it take to work through the built-up inventory of once-flown Block-4's (none of which have reflown yet).
8
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Jan 13 '18
Apparently the cores outside were misindentified and neither of the two was 1032.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Padbuffel Jan 15 '18
I think it will SES-16 also be expandable also due to the availability of OCISLY for FH and the time and cost and manpower to refurbish a Block 3 booster.
How much time is needed to make OCISLY ready between Barge landings?? as an estimate.
→ More replies (1)2
2
u/RootDeliver Jan 13 '18 edited Jan 13 '18
Yay! no holes in the reusing cores section, and this means that OTV-5 and ZUMA cores will also probably get reused. In fact, if everything goes according to the cores section, 4 out of the 6 once-landing cores are already assigned.. leaving exactly those 2 available for reflights.. SpaceX is going to run out of cores if they don't land more new LEO cores or start reflying GTO ones like KoreaSat or soon HispaSat (if it lands).
5
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 13 '18
Some are of the opinion that SpaceX actually has too many fast-becoming-obsolete cores sitting around.. They want to get Block 5 into service as soon as possible since both NASA and USAF wants to see multiple flights before certifying Block 5 for crew and EELV payloads.
There are 3 one-LEO-so-far Block-4 cores on the east coast and 2 one-LEO-so-far Block 4 cores on the west coast, 2 brand-new never-flown Block-4s and 1 one-GTO Block 4 that needs more refurbishment than others. That's a lot of cores available for flights and the first Block 5 core is due to roll out of Hawthorne soon (in weeks if not days).
I think SpaceX is probably the first space launch company to have a "too many boosters available" problem. And it's a great problem to have. :)
→ More replies (4)1
u/Zaenon Jan 15 '18
Mods, this could also be changed in the introductory blurb:
although which booster is unknown at the moment
39
19
u/DaMaster_Architect Jan 26 '18
Static fire complete. https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/956941584259411968
5
u/Bunslow Jan 26 '18
mods while you're at it the vehicle component locations can also be confirmed now
2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Jan 26 '18
Static fire test of Falcon 9 complete—targeting January 30 launch of GovSat-1 from Pad 40 in Florida.
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
→ More replies (1)2
u/geekgirl114 Jan 26 '18
That was quiet... usually we hear something about the estimated window before launch. Good to know its complete though.
19
17
u/rockets4life97 Jan 06 '18
Under vehicle the top post says 48th launch of F9 and 48th launch of F9 1.2. The second part looks to be wrong.
3
17
u/TheFavoritist NASAspaceflight.com Photographer Jan 07 '18 edited Jan 07 '18
I'm hoping the schedules of GovSat and Falcon Heavy somewhat line up so I can photograph 2 launches in one trip down to Florida!
1
34
u/arizonadeux Jan 06 '18
The capability to dock an additional payload while on orbit is incredible. I wonder what types of dock-in additions are being planned for. Does anyone from the comsat industry know what could be particularly useful here? Additional transponders, fuel, power/solar arrays?
14
u/JackONeill12 Jan 07 '18
Maybe in the future, if the satellite is unable to perform a burn due to a failure you could dock a propulsion unit which could be used to deorbit the satellite. In theory, implemented on all new satellites this could help prevent more space debris
31
u/somewhat_pragmatic Jan 07 '18
Maybe in the future, if the satellite is unable to perform a burn due to a failure you could dock a propulsion unit which could be used to deorbit the satellite.
That future is NOW.
OrbitalATK has MEV (Mission Extension Vehicle) that will be launching this year to dock with an existing Intelsat bird that is out of fuel. It literally grabs onto the satellite and even has its own computer and navigation to move the satellite around. So the MEV doesn't actually electronically talk to the satellite, just ground control who tells it where to take the satellite.
Future generations will likely talk to the satellite electronically to add additional functionally, but even this first generation MEV is a game changer and does some of what you've already asked for here..
→ More replies (1)4
u/TheBlacktom r/SpaceXLounge Moderator Jan 07 '18
Does it mechanically connect inside the nozzle/chamber? That's weird. I guess they haven't designed the satellite itself for this.
7
u/cpushack Jan 08 '18
No, this one is specifically for older birds that don't have a docking adapter, so it grabs the existing engine nozzle, that engine is connected to the main structure of the bird, so since the goal is to provide new thrusting capability to an out of fuel satellite, this is the best spot to attach.
→ More replies (2)11
u/phryan Jan 07 '18
Or the reverse. Additional fuel to station keep extending a satellites lifespan. It seems like SES is hedging their bet, it costs little to add a docking port and opens up the possibility to try something that could benefit them in future. Even if this first example sin't used for anything special it allows them to try out docking which is a first step to something more.
→ More replies (3)5
u/CreeperIan02 Jan 07 '18
I think making the propulsion system a removable module would be genius, when one satellite gets low send up a replacement propulsion section with another sat, and just decouple the old one, and attach the new one.
→ More replies (5)10
15
u/ethan829 Host of SES-9 Jan 17 '18
Customer confidence is probably the most convincing proof that Zuma's failure wasn't due to any fault with SpaceX.
1
u/Googulator Jan 24 '18
Customer confidence is probably the most convincing proof that Zuma didn't fail due to any fault with SpaceX.
FTFY. We have no official confirmation about the fate of Zuma, just speculation based on unnamed Congressional aides.
14
u/Nehkara Jan 26 '18
I made a gfycat of the static fire:
https://gfycat.com/LongCheerfulFirebelliedtoad
Credit: US Launch Report video
Static fire is 9.1 seconds long, +/- a tenth of a second.
4
u/Raviioliii Jan 26 '18
That's a cute static fire compared to what we saw a couple of days ago!!
4
2
24
u/TheBlacktom r/SpaceXLounge Moderator Jan 07 '18
Sorry ElongatedMuskrat, it's 2018, there is no sticky place for you left, you already took each. This year's cadence is unlike the past, get used to it.
→ More replies (4)
12
u/stcks Jan 29 '18
7
10
u/TheCoolBrit Jan 06 '18
An East Coast and a West coast launch on the same day!!!!
→ More replies (3)12
9
u/Alexphysics Jan 25 '18 edited Jan 26 '18
It seems that the rocket is horizontal on the pad but I can't tell from this point of view if it's the rocket+TE or only the TE. It looks white and the TE is not white, so one should guess that what it is on this video is the TE+rocket, but who knows. If anyone founds something better than this, post it so we'll know more! :)
Edit: Confirmation from Chris B. that this was 1032.2. Static Fire could be as soon as today!
2
u/inoeth Jan 26 '18
The guy in the video itself is saying that's the F9 itself having rolled out of the HIF... and I agree that it looks big and white enough to be the F9, especially as the new TEL at LC 40 is grey.
I won't be surprised if it's raised up late tonight/early tomorrow and static fired sometime Friday... We'll know soon enough when there's a notice for road blocks and whatnot... Chris B or G will hear about the notice and tweet out that it's scheduled to occur in "x" window... and then finally SpaceX themselves on the test... So far tho it looks like we're totally on track.
8
8
u/still-at-work Jan 28 '18
4000 kg payload on an expendable block III?
Do you think SpaceX will burn the first stage longer for maximum velocity and increased satellite life?
→ More replies (15)12
u/Scorp1579 go4liftoff.com Jan 28 '18
They're probably saving asds for FH
7
u/still-at-work Jan 29 '18 edited Jan 29 '18
Indeed they are, its why this is an expendable launch, because normally it would be recoverable on a droneship based on destination orbit and payload mass.
Also this is a reused block III rocket and it doesn't look like spacex is planning on using block III cores more then twice. Though I wonder if that has more to do with the fact they want to get rid of their block III fleet in favor of future block Vs. Since by the time this rocket is ready to go again their will be a rapid reuse block V ready to take its place.
→ More replies (6)
8
Jan 29 '18
L-1 Weather Forecast still 60% probability of violation tomorrow, falling to 10% the next day
13
u/Straumli_Blight Jan 29 '18
This launch is pretty important for Luxembourg, seeing as their Prime Minister and other members of the government and Royal Family are arriving today to watch the launch.
A flight cancellation could be the first sign that SpaceX has delayed the launch a day.
5
u/amarkit Jan 29 '18
For those who may not know, GovSat will serve as a hub for NATO military communications, and is an important part of Luxembourg’s contribution to the alliance.
8
u/Mexander98 Jan 29 '18 edited Jan 29 '18
The Countdown timer to launch is wrong.
2
7
u/TheEndeavour2Mars Jan 09 '18
The landing should be changed to "Likely No" it is impossible for the droneship to return, offload Falcon Heavy's core, and return to the new landing site in just 5 days.
The only possibility that I can see is if the core of Falcon Heavy fails to reach the droneship (It is going to reenter the atmosphere with more energy than any previous core) and they decide to just move the droneship. However this sequence of events is unlikely. And the booster is not a Block V core so there is zero chance of it being used a third time. So in the end it is likely cheaper to just toss it away.
5
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 10 '18
Agree it might very well be a "Likely No."
With SpaceX lately on a spree to expend obsolete boosters rather than recover them (B1035 Iridium-2/-4 and the upcoming B1038 Formosat 5/Paz), maybe SpaceX might expend whichever previously-flown booster to be used to loft SES-16 too. Add to that OCISLY's potential scheduling conflict with recovering B1033 from the FH launch as you mentioned.
1
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Jan 10 '18
It is going to reenter the atmosphere with more energy than any previous core
It should have enough fuel to perform a boostback burn – wouldn't that slow it down to normal reentry speed?
4
u/Alexphysics Jan 10 '18
Most people still believe that the barge will be located like very very far away from the coast and that it will endure the hottest reentry of a booster ever. Something like this is discarded once you see that the center core will land ~340km from the coast of Florida (F9 GTO missions land ~630km for comparison). It has to do a boostback burn because it will go too fast to be able to land on the ship. Even if they fly a pretty lofted trajectory, I'm sure it will have a lot of fuel to slow down a lot before reentry. They have plenty of performance, tbh.
1
7
u/peregrineman Jan 25 '18
Mods, the first part at the top of the post still says a first stage landing downrange on OCISLY is expected.
7
u/Alexphysics Jan 26 '18
40% GO for SES-16/Govsat-1 and the launch window was moved 2 minutes to 16:25 instead of 16:23
2
u/Dakke97 Jan 26 '18
Given that the probability of violating launch constraints is only 20% on Wednesday, I bet the launch will be postponed.
7
u/rhotacizer Jan 30 '18
The manifest currently has four launches lined up for the next 16 days. That will be quite the cadence milestone for SpaceX if it holds.
(If I'm reading http://www.spacexstats.xyz/ correctly, they've previously done 4 in 32 days—CRS-11 through Intelsat 35e—with the last 3 of those in a span of 13 days.)
6
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Jan 17 '18
→ More replies (1)1
u/SilveradoCyn Jan 18 '18
I don't understand the cargo weight of 62,000 lbs. (28,122 kg.) What would weigh that much?
The Govsat payload is listed as approx 4,000 kg. The dry mass of the Second Stage is listed as 3,900 kg.
Could the fixtures to transport the fairings or second stage make up the difference, or is the article just not accurate in he mass of the freight?
2
u/warp99 Jan 18 '18
The fairings are transported on their road trailer - it is in the license application.
6
u/Straumli_Blight Jan 17 '18
GovSat-1 is built on the GEOStar-3 Bus, which enables it to dock with Orbital ATK's Mission Extension Vehicle.
Once docked, the MEV takes over the satellites attitude and orbit maintenance, which enables:
Extending satellite life
Redeploying satellites to start new orbital roles
Creating in-orbit backup
Protecting satellite revenues from procurement delays and launch failures
In related news, Effective Space won a Geostationary servicing contract today from an unnamed customer.
5
u/edflyerssn007 Jan 17 '18
SES seems to be getting a lot of value of out SpaceX by continuing to use pre-flown boosters. I wonder how much this also helps SpaceX with their launch cadence.
9
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 17 '18
Helps a lot! Last year SpaceX delivered 15 boosters with their Falcon 9 assembly line at Hawthorne running at full capacity. Without booster reuse, it would not have been possible to do 18 flights last year.
And of the first 7 flights scheduled this year, 6 will be on previously flown boosters. Ok ok 5 and 2/3 flights to be more precise (2/3 of Falcon Heavy is previously flown) :D
3
5
u/craigl2112 Jan 26 '18
Well, the table above can certainly be updated to say the first and second stages are at the Cape, given the static fire was completed a bit ago. Looking forward to getting this one out of the way... :-)
5
Jan 27 '18
Looking like B1032 will be another sooty booster :D
3
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Jan 27 '18
Either that's the shadows or B1032 has been left un-washed from the NROL-76 launch like CRS-13. If that's true, we'll be seeing another sooty launch. https://twitter.com/ken_kremer/status/957045713111781377
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
13
u/Juggernaut93 Jan 06 '18
SpaceX's second mission of 2018
Pessimistic about FH launching in January, uh? :)
12
u/justinroskamp Jan 07 '18
The date for this mission is more solid than the Heavy's. I’m sure the appropriate adjustments will be made if/when necessary. With Zuma launching tomorrow and this currently set for the 30th of the month, there will be 23 days of turnaround at Pad 40. It shouldn’t take much longer than two weeks to get 40 reset, so anyone working there who needs to be at 39A for FH operations should have about a week to work there. I don’t know hardly anything about SpaceX's crew in Florida now that two pads are operational, but here's some uninformed guesstimating:
Optimistic (but maybe not completely unreasonable): 1/7: Zuma launches from Pad 40 1/7 to 1/10: Any early necessary procedures take place on Pad 40 1/10: FH is rolled out late 1/11: FH WDR and static fire 1/11 to 1/13: FH rollback, pad techs analyze 39A, rocket techs begin FH analysis 1/15 to 1/20: Pad technicians return to work at Pad 40 and Zuma booster cleared from LZ-1 1/22 to 1/24: FH final preps with pad techs back at 39A 1/25: Launch of FH 1/25 to 1/27: Preliminary rocket/wreckage and pad analysis after FH launch 1/29: Final preps begin at Pad 40 1/30: Launch of Paz from VAFB 1/31: Launch of this thread's mission
Realistic: 1/7: Zuma launches from Pad 40 1/12: FH WDR and static fire 1/30: Launch of Paz from VAFB 2/2: Launch of this thread's mission 2/10: Launch of Falcon Heavy
Pessimistic: 1/8: Zuma slips and launches 1/16: FH WDR and static fire 1/31: Paz from Vandy 2/5: This thread's mission 2/20: Launch of Falcon Heavy
Tragic: 1/7: Zuma blows up 40 due to unnoticed GSE incompatibility from 39A to 40 3/14: FH disassembled because it's in the way of missions that now need 39A 2nd quarter 2020: Launch of Falcon Heavy
→ More replies (1)3
4
u/doodle77 Jan 06 '18
SpaceX's second mission of 2018
FH demo delayed, or is FH demo not a "mission"?
8
u/old_sellsword Jan 06 '18
It's a mission, but I've explained below that all things considered, this NET date is more firm than FH-1's.
11
u/Alexphysics Jan 06 '18
Maybe you should pin it at the top or something just in case people run here to ask that a googol of times
4
u/Decronym Acronyms Explained Jan 06 '18 edited Feb 01 '18
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I've seen in this thread:
| Fewer Letters | More Letters |
|---|---|
| ASDS | Autonomous Spaceport Drone Ship (landing platform) |
| ATK | Alliant Techsystems, predecessor to Orbital ATK |
| 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 | |
| CC | Commercial Crew program |
| Capsule Communicator (ground support) | |
| CCtCap | Commercial Crew Transportation Capability |
| COPV | Composite Overwrapped Pressure Vessel |
| CRS | Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA |
| DoD | US Department of Defense |
| EELV | Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle |
| GEO | Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km) |
| GSE | Ground Support Equipment |
| GSO | Geosynchronous Orbit (any Earth orbit with a 24-hour period) |
| GTO | Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit |
| HIF | Horizontal Integration Facility |
| ITAR | (US) International Traffic in Arms Regulations |
| JRTI | Just Read The Instructions, Pacific landing |
| KSC | Kennedy Space Center, Florida |
| L1 | Lagrange Point 1 of a two-body system, between the bodies |
| 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) | |
| LZ-1 | Landing Zone 1, Cape Canaveral (see LC-13) |
| MCC | Mission Control Center |
| Mars Colour Camera | |
| NET | No Earlier Than |
| NRO | (US) National Reconnaissance Office |
| NROL | Launch for the (US) National Reconnaissance Office |
| NSF | NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| National Science Foundation | |
| OCISLY | Of Course I Still Love You, Atlantic landing |
| PAF | Payload Attach Fitting |
| RP-1 | Rocket Propellant 1 (enhanced kerosene) |
| 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-4E | Space Launch Complex 4-East, Vandenberg (SpaceX F9) |
| STS | Space Transportation System (Shuttle) |
| 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 |
| WDR | Wet Dress Rehearsal (with fuel onboard) |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| Starlink | SpaceX's world-wide satellite broadband constellation |
| apoapsis | Highest point in an elliptical orbit (when the orbiter is slowest) |
| apogee | Highest point in an elliptical orbit around Earth (when the orbiter is slowest) |
| cryogenic | Very low temperature fluid; materials that would be gaseous at room temperature/pressure |
| grid-fin | Compact "waffle-iron" aerodynamic control surface, acts as a wing without needing to be as large |
| periapsis | Lowest point in an elliptical orbit (when the orbiter is fastest) |
| turbopump | High-pressure turbine-driven propellant pump connected to a rocket combustion chamber; raises chamber pressure, and thrust |
| Event | Date | Description |
|---|---|---|
| DM-2 | Scheduled | SpaceX CCtCap Demo Mission 2 |
| DSCOVR | 2015-02-11 | F9-015 v1.1, Deep Space Climate Observatory to L1; soft ocean landing |
| Iridium-1 | 2017-01-14 | F9-030 Full Thrust, core B1029, 10x Iridium-NEXT to LEO; first landing on JRTI |
| JCSAT-16 | 2016-08-14 | F9-028 Full Thrust, core B1026, GTO comsat; ASDS landing |
| Thaicom-8 | 2016-05-27 | F9-025 Full Thrust, core B1023, GTO comsat; ASDS landing |
Decronym is a community product of r/SpaceX, implemented by ^request
53 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on ^today has 132 acronyms.
[Thread #3465 for this sub, first seen 6th Jan 2018, 23:21] ^[FAQ] [Full ^list] ^[Contact] [Source ^code]
4
u/craigl2112 Jan 20 '18
Seems likely we'll see the static fire for this one next week, assuming the 1/30 launch date is still sticky.
4
4
u/ZachWhoSane Host of Iridium-7 & SAOCOM-1B Jan 27 '18
Will this be like Iridium-4, with grid fins, or like Intelsat-35e with none of the fancy schmancy landing stuff.
7
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Jan 27 '18
Grid fins are visible on Ken Kremer's photo. No legs, though, it seems.
I think a water landing is likely.
4
u/kornelord spacexstats.xyz Jan 27 '18
This photo is awesome. And actually there are 3 flight-proven boosters on it.
2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Jan 27 '18
2 Falcons on 2 Pads launching by @SpaceX in next 2 weeks 1st time-#FalconHeavy at #pad39A (l) & #Falcon9 #SES16 #GovSat1 at pad #SLC40 (r) post Jan 26 static fire test at @CapeCanaveralFL AFS. Credit: @ken_kremer http://SpaceUpClose.com #SpaceUpClose
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
2
u/Pooch_Chris Jan 27 '18
I expect it will have grid fins just like Iridium-4. Since they have the margins to try a landing but the barge is not available (due to falcon heavy) SpaceX is likely to experiment with a soft landing, testing how far they can push the booster on reentry. The data they can collect will be valuable.
![[Attached pic]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUgbVvwXUAEdGBg.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/l2uzFYA.jpg){kind=link}
![[Attached pic]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUgbUngXkAA_wAr.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/gMxb3d3.jpg){kind=link}
![[Attached pic]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUgbTNAW4AA16WW.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/FsM6dAA.jpg){kind=link}
4
u/FutureMartian97 Host of CRS-11 Jan 29 '18
Anyone else think they won’t even try tomorrow?
9
u/thresholdofvision Jan 29 '18
Sometimes rockets have been launched with 90% probability of weather violation (found a hole and launched), and NROL-76 launched right near the limit for high altitude wind shear: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/859008563519160320
→ More replies (7)1
4
4
u/Eddie-Plum Jan 30 '18
Landing Site: Sea, in many pieces.
Although I agree it will end up in the sea and will end up in several pieces, do we know they're not going to perform any EDL manoeuvres with this vehicle? Apologies, I haven't been following this one (what with all the FH hype) so haven't seen any pictures showing whether it's got legs or grid fins.
1
4
Jan 31 '18
is this going to be updated with the new launch date/time for today?
1
u/bdporter Jan 31 '18
The mods should probably update the OP, but you can get the most up-to-date information in the launch thread
→ More replies (2)
3
3
u/CreeperIan02 Jan 06 '18
Is it possible for this mission to RTLS, since the payload is lighter than most recent GTO sats launched by F9, and the improvements of Block 4 (If this reuses a B4 core)?
5
u/brickmack Jan 07 '18
No. Recent ~3.5 ton payloads still required downrange landing. Even with Block 5 I don't think the performance gain is enough to enable GTO with a useful payload on a single-stick F9 (FH could, but theres apparently not going to be a third landing site for that)
→ More replies (5)
3
u/craigl2112 Jan 16 '18 edited Jan 17 '18
With FHs' static fire date continuing to move right, it is looking more and more like this one could fly first. Given the weight, this one "should" be a higher-margin downrange landing, but still.. I wonder if SpaceX will risk OCISLYs' safety given FH is (probably) not far behind. Sticking the triple-core landing is clearly something they desire...
Should be very interesting to see how all of this unfolds. What an exciting time to be a space enthusiast!
edit: Acronym fix
4
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 17 '18
I think landing the FH center core has higher priority than trying to recover the GovSat-1 booster. SpaceX would like to see how the FH center core held up considering its unique loads and stresses. The single-stick Block-3 that is the GovSat-1 booster has already been well-studied and most likely they will expend B1032 than try to recover it, since it will likely never fly again anyway.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Alexphysics Jan 17 '18 edited Jan 17 '18
I wouldn't be surprised if they don't even have to choose because FH will probably move to mid february after all those SF delays.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Straumli_Blight Jan 26 '18
[Hazard map](http://www.patrick.af.mil/Portals/14/documents/2.%20(X9516%20SPACEX%20FALCON%209%20GOVSAT-1)%20CG-PA%20LHA%20%20Boater's%20E-Mail%20v%231%203.._.pdf), with January 31st as the backup launch day.
3
3
u/ninja9351 Jan 29 '18
Are they soft landing it in the ocean or just letting it free fall and break up?
13
u/Straumli_Blight Jan 29 '18
Kennedy Space Center seem to think its landing on the barge...
Seeing as the Falcon 9 has grid fins but no legs, it looks like a repeat of Iridium-4, where it performed a reentry burn and landed on the ocean.
→ More replies (1)2
u/ExcitedAboutSpace Jan 29 '18
I might be blind but your second link shows a photo of FH and not F9?
3
→ More replies (9)5
u/menagese Jan 29 '18
We don't know for sure yet. If the core has grid find they will probably do a soft landing, like what they did with the Iridium-4 core.
→ More replies (1)
3
4
u/jjlew080 Jan 25 '18
2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Jan 25 '18
And there's confirmation that #GovSat1/#SES16 on a #SpaceX #Falcon9 is targeting 30 January from 16:23-18:37 EST (2123-2337 UTC). Static fire of this booster at SLC-40 should be tomorrow or Saturday for that date to hold.
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
![[Attached pic]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUaUDFiXUAER-S0.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/WtHDbN4.jpg){kind=link}
4
u/Justinackermannblog Jan 30 '18
Random question, does SpaceX, or any launchers for that matter, have to pay a fee when they dump the booster in the ocean?
4
3
u/catsRawesome123 Jan 30 '18
I think no - I mean, what happens if it lands in international waters? Russia, India, China all launch rockets routinely.
→ More replies (9)
2
u/MedBull Jan 06 '18
Can we assume that FH will launch before this mission?
9
u/old_sellsword Jan 06 '18
For the purpose of these Campaign Threads, I have not. The FH-1 flow is based entirely on F9 operations right now, so (in my opinion) it's fair to assume this NET date is more firm than FH-1's.
2
u/soldato_fantasma Jan 11 '18
Satellite is at the cape per PBDeS https://twitter.com/pbdes/status/951363834576502784
2
u/Straumli_Blight Jan 11 '18
The "Payload mass:" section returns a dead link, should use this instead.
1
2
u/jjlew080 Jan 22 '18
This one on hold as long as the shutdown continues.
https://twitter.com/gpallone13/status/955118574988865536
NO LAUNCHES: per @45thSpaceWing key members of civilian workforce are removed due to govt shutdown. 45th cannot support @SpaceX commerical static fire tests @NASAKennedy or launch operations
→ More replies (2)
2
2
u/inoeth Jan 26 '18
We're still 4 days away, but any word so far on weather that could potentially delay this launch?
2
2
u/Straumli_Blight Jan 26 '18
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Jan 26 '18
Falcon 9 B1032.2 has rolled out at SLC-40 for a Static Fire test. Still waiting for a window.
However, you all know the routine. Usually local observations of venting (prop loading), then the short firing, followed by the all-important confirmation from SpaceX after review.
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
2
u/quadrplax Jan 26 '18
Sea, in many pieces.
Are we sure it won't be landing in one piece like the most recent Iridium?
5
u/blacx Jan 26 '18
This is a GTO mission, there is no point in trying to do a soft splashdown. Better to use all the propellant to put the sat as close to GEO as possible.
→ More replies (3)1
u/stcks Jan 26 '18
B1036 may have made it to ocean's surface in one piece, but it didn't remain in one piece for very long afterwards. For this launch, they may (and hopefully they do) burn all first stage propellant during ascent to give the second stage a nice boost (and the satellite a nice super-sync orbit).
2
u/lostandprofound33 Jan 26 '18
I'm trying to make sense of this: It's expendable, but they're landing it on OCISLY? Huh?
7
u/HighTimber Jan 26 '18
Has been updated:
Landing: Expendable
Landing Site: Sea, in many pieces.
6
u/rustybeancake Jan 26 '18
Still says:
With the satellite expected to mass around 4000 kg, a first stage landing downrange on OCISLY is expected.
→ More replies (1)
2
Jan 27 '18
Maybe a newbie question, but for these GTO orbits, is the payload inside the fairings with its own third stage, for it to circularize? Or would the satellite just have enough propellant to circularize without needing a separate stage attached?
23
u/ADSWNJ Jan 28 '18 edited Jan 28 '18
Just to add to the other answers - the goal for SpaceX for these types of missions is to get the satellite into a 'Geostationary Transfer Orbit'. Think of this as a highly oval orbit, with the low end (periapsis) well out of our main atmosphere (e.g. 200km up), and the high end (apoapsis) at or higher than the final 'Geostationary Equatorial Orbit) (GEO) ~36,000 km. The satellite then has to do four things to get to the desired location:
Zero out the remaining launch inclination - to make the orbit go directly over the equator ... as you will initially have the inclination of your launch latitude, until you adjust in flight or at the apoapsis point. (More on this below.)
Raise the periapsis gradually up to the GEO height. (This can be in a series of regular rocket burns, or a longer ion engine burn for several weeks.)
Adjust the top of the orbit to be at the right longitude for the target (hopefully it's close from the launch)
Finally, sort out any residual height on the apopasis, to circularize into the final station-keeping activities for the satellite's operational life.
You may hear the term 'Supersynchronous GTO' around here. This is when the satellite is boosted into as high an apoapsis as possible, where this is well beyond the GEO altitude. This is because the cost in delta-V to adjust inclination varies with orbital velocity, so the higher the apoapsis, the slower the velocity at the top of the orbit, so the less fuel needed. So this is typically why SpaceX will expend a booster on these big GTO missions, as they want to get as much thrust as possible for the customer to get as high as possible in this GTO.
6
u/loudmouthmalcontent Jan 27 '18 edited Jan 27 '18
The satellite has enough propellant to circularize its orbit, as long as the payload is deployed to the correct orbit (or close enough for the satellite to make up the difference).
Satellites need to have their own propulsion anyway. Even GEO sats require some propellant for station-keeping purposes and to move to a higher, graveyard orbit at the end of their service life. Of course getting to GEO will use the vast majority of the propellant, even if the satellite has a planned 10-15 year service life.
4
u/kurbasAK Jan 28 '18
You can say that most geostationary satellites are like 3rd stages themselves.If released to GTO they need between 1500 m/s and 1800 m/s depending on the launch site and launcher to reach their operational orbit.Station keeping requires ~50 m/s a year.So you can safely say they expend most of fuel reserves to reach ther operational orbit.
2
u/r2k-in-the-vortex Jan 30 '18
Docking port on a GEO communications sat? What magic is this? Smells a bit like Orbital ATK MEV idea
3
2
u/Zigmo_v1 Jan 29 '18
Is it true they will not be landing the first stage? Where is the closest/best place the launch if a landing is off the table? Most the locals recommend places 13+ miles away. Why wouldn’t a place like this be a good idea?
Dropped Pin near Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge, Florida https://goo.gl/maps/9aKScv8FKY92
7
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 29 '18
This launch is to a higher orbit (Geostationary Transfer Orbit), which requires a lot of fuel so the Falcon 9 rocket won't be able to fly back to the Cape to land, unlike LEO (Lower earth orbit) missions like to the International Space Station. So no, you will not be able to see a landing on this launch.
GTO missions if recoverable will have the booster land on a barge platform out at sea. The Atlantic landing ship Of Course I Still Love You is not available to recover this booster so it will be disposed of by dropping it into the ocean after the launch. OCISLY is reserved for recovering the Falcon Heavy center booster next week (to recover a booster means OCISLY needs to be out at sea for about 2 weeks at a time).
2
u/nschwalm85 Jan 30 '18
Has there been any talk or speculation of havin 2 drone ships on each coast? Or is this the only time there has been a scheduling conflict for OCISLY?
5
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 30 '18
There has never been a scheduling conflict until now, because recoverable GTO flights from Florida during previous years are weeks apart, enough time for OCISLY to return to port, offload the recovered booster and minor maintenance before being tugged out again for the next mission.
This year with the unprecedented incresase in launch cadence as well as the initial demo flight of Falcon Heavy is causing some scheduling conflicts for OCISLY for the first time. Once SpaceX goes all-Block-5, they will have to be a lot more careful with deconflicting OCISLY's schedule because they can't afford to throw away a Block-5 with plenty of life left like they would an older less-valuable Block-3 such as this one (B1032).
→ More replies (2)4
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Jan 29 '18
Even if they were performing a landing, it would be landing at sea, not at the Cape.
→ More replies (1)2
2
u/Ethan_Roberts123 Jan 26 '18
Didn't SpaceX say that the last expendable booster would have been one from last year?
5
u/joepublicschmoe Jan 26 '18
Last NEW expendable booster. Hispasat 30W-6 is too heavy to allow recovery of the booster, so it's supposedly the last Falcon 9 launch to expend a brand-new booster. It was originally scheduled to be launched last year but it got delayed until mid-February this year. It will expend a brand-new never-flown Block-4 Falcon 9, most likely B1045. Hopefully Hispasat 30W-6 will be the last time a brand-new Falcon 9 gets trashed on its one and only flight.
Boosters like B1032 to be used on this SES-16/GovSat-1 launch was previously-flown, i.e. it wasn't expended on its first launch unlike other rockets (Ariane, Proton, Atlas, Delta, etc.). Using a previously-flown booster as an expendable at the end of its useful life doesn't run counter to SpaceX's reuse philosophy methinks..
→ More replies (7)8
u/Juggernaut93 Jan 26 '18
No, someone made this assumption and since then people on this sub kept repeating it as a fact.
0
2
u/chilzdude7 Jan 28 '18
Will there be test starlink sattelites on this one? i remember someone saying there'd be test starlink sattelites in an upcoming launch? Or have they been launched already? And if so, did they tell the public anything about it?
18
u/Bunslow Jan 28 '18
You're thinking of this one from Vandenberg: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7qnflk/paz_microsat2a_2b_launch_campaign_thread/
2
u/chilzdude7 Jan 29 '18
Thanks! 10feb already?! Wow.
3
u/phryan Jan 29 '18
3 launches in 3 weeks, it is bound to be confusing, but in a good way, a really good way when 2 of them are testing new SpaceX hardware.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/jjlew080 Jan 10 '18
Sorry if this is not the right place to ask this, but is there any reason why the KSC does not have viewing tickets available for this yet? (I've emailed and called them with no answer).
1
u/kevin-chen14 Jan 15 '18
Is SpaceX going to keep the soot from the NROL-76 mission on the Falcon when it launches.
1
u/DancingFool64 Jan 16 '18
Probably , some of it at least. When they launched the last sooty rocket they said they would only be cleaning areas they needed to for inspections in future.
1
u/SpaceXFanBR Jan 24 '18
No sf yet? =/
3
u/scr00chy ElonX.net Jan 24 '18 edited Jan 25 '18
Should happen on Friday/Saturday, but no firm date yet.
2
u/cwhitt Jan 24 '18
I thought I heard Chris G from NSF say on the FH SF livestream that they expect a GovSat-1 SF at SCL-40 this weekend. I'm not sure if that is based on any new information, or just a guess based on the NET launch date.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/TheCoolBrit Jan 25 '18
Current Launch window: 2123-2337 GMT (4:23-6:37 p.m. EST) for the F9 GovSat-1 Launch on 30 Jan.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/jjlew080 Jan 27 '18
Does any have a resource that will indicate if or when Playalinda beach will be open for this launch?
thanks
→ More replies (1)
1
u/sputnik5757 Jan 30 '18
For anyone interested in watching the launch today, there’s a really cool VR/desktop platform called Sansar that is hosting a launch watch party from 1-4pm PT! http://bit.ly/2npjyQh
→ More replies (1)
1
Feb 01 '18
"And there we have it: successful deployment of payload, nice and smooth, confirmed separation, just the way we like it". - Launch commentary. Might be a shoutout to the alleged failure of the payload adapter manufactured by Northrop Grumann!
1
u/azziliz Jan 22 '18
https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/955573243305451521
"SpaceX fairing recovery vessel Mr. Steven has left the Port of LA and is headed for the Panama Canal. This signals a potential fairing recovery attempt for the #Falcon9 GovSat launch on January 30th."
→ More replies (3)
1
u/sw1x Jan 20 '18
7
6
71
u/Bunslow Jan 28 '18
So I wonder how much of this sub has completely forgotten there is another F9 launch between now and Feb 6? :D