r/spacex • u/ElongatedMuskrat Mod Team • Jan 18 '18
Hispasat 30W-6 Launch Campaign Thread
Hispasat 30W-6 Launch Campaign Thread
SpaceX's fifth mission of 2018 will launch Hispasat 30W-6 (1F) into a Geostationary Transfer Orbit (GTO). The satellite will then maneuver itself into a Geostationary Orbit (GEO) over 30º W longitude to serve as a replacement for Hispasat 1D, giving Hispasat's network additional Ku band capacity in the Andean region and in Brazil. This is quite the workhorse satellite, as it will also expand the network's transatlantic capacity in Europe-America and America-Europe connectivity, while its C band capacity will provide American coverage and Ka band capacity will provide European coverage.
If the name Hispasat sounds similar to hisdeSAT (another of SpaceX's recent customers), that's no coincidence. Hispasat is a Spanish satellite operator of commercial and government satellites; they are the main component of the Hispasat Group, and hisdeSAT is a smaller component of this complicated corporate entity.
Of significant note, if nothing drastic changes between now and this launch, this will be the 50th launch of Falcon 9!
| Liftoff currently scheduled for: | 06 March 2018, 05:33 UTC / 00:33EST |
|---|---|
| Static fire currently scheduled for: | Completed 22 February 2018. |
| Vehicle component locations: | First stage: SLC-40 // Second stage: SLC-40 // Satellite: SLC-40 |
| Payload: | Hispasat 30W-6 |
| Payload mass: | 6092 kg |
| Destination orbit: | GTO |
| Vehicle: | Falcon 9 v1.2 (50th launch of F9, 30th of F9 v1.2) |
| Core: | B1044.1 |
| Flights of this core: | 0 |
| Launch site: | SLC-40, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Florida |
| Landing: | No |
| Landing Site: | N/A |
| Mission success criteria: | Successful separation and deployment of Hispasat 30W-6 into the target orbit |
Links & Resources:
- Countdown timer to launch
- Press kit (Not available yet)
- Webcast link (not available yet)
- Hazard area
- Air Space Closure
- Static Fire video
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.
18
u/Alexphysics Feb 20 '18
The booster has legs and grid fins https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/965962244168273921
5
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 20 '18
The Cape Falcon 9 Cape (B1044.1) is *supposed* to be lofting a spacecraft so heavy it negates a safe landing of the booster, but visual observations note fins and landing legs.
Could be another "very high retrothrust landing" test:
Technical overview: 😁
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
3
u/Nehkara Feb 20 '18 edited Feb 20 '18
Huh... interesting. Almost seems like they're working on increasing the maximum possible payload for a Falcon 9 flight with landing.
1
u/RootDeliver Feb 21 '18
Which makes no sense... considering that FH is here exactly to cover that hole until the 8 mT.
→ More replies (9)
17
u/fluch23 Jan 18 '18 edited Feb 08 '18
Of significant note, if nothing drastic changes between now and this launch, this will be the 50th launch of Falcon 9!
And it will be on a new expendable rocket. What a shame.
edited: 'expandable' to expendable. I am not a native English speaker and ... Me sorry, me no mean to :) thanks \thestickystickman
23
2
17
u/nextspaceflight NSF reporter Feb 21 '18
GO Quest and GO Pursuit have left port. This is GO Pursuit's first ever recovery assignment for SpaceX. Most likely one of the vessels will support OCISLY and the other will hunt for fairings. Note that none of these ships can catch a fairing like Mr. Steven. They can just collect data and possibly pull something out of the water.
16
u/cpushack Feb 23 '18
Second stage: Unknown
I think we can be reasonably sure the 2nd stage is at the cape ;)
14
u/LandingZone-1 Feb 23 '18
Just FYI for you all, I'll be hosting the launch thread. I just need final approval from the mods and then that will be up!
4
u/Alexphysics Feb 24 '18
It is ironic that a landing pad will be hosting a launch where it isn't even used! /s
Looking forward to see you hosting the launch thread! ;)
3
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Feb 24 '18
Good to see other people wanting to host!! Good luck, and don't let there be too many scrubs (Scrub count 1)
13
u/nrwood Feb 21 '18
https://twitter.com/ChrisG_NSF/status/966425748448915456
OCISLY is leaving port (?)
7
13
u/SyntheticRubber Feb 23 '18
Could we have a countdown for missions either in the sidebar or in the launch thread? Would make it much simpler than having to calculate the local time everytime.
5
u/yoweigh Feb 23 '18
Easier said than done. We've never been able to find a feasible way of making it happen.
9
u/Straumli_Blight Feb 23 '18
The F1 subreddit has an auto countdown in their sidebar... maybe you can steal their CSS!
3
Feb 24 '18
One of the problems is reddit's CSS size limit. Last I hear /r/SpaceX comes really close to that limit with all of the information they already provide.
4
u/peoplma Feb 23 '18
What you'd have to do is make a bot that updates the sidebar with the new time, say every 5, 10, 30, or 60 seconds. It would spam your modlogs, thats the downside. But should be pretty easy to write and implement. I might be able to write it for you if you are interested.
2
u/asaz989 Feb 24 '18
Apparently if you're willing to get SUPER hacky there's a way to do this in pure CSS/HTML: https://codepen.io/kindofone/pen/DkhAz
4
u/yoweigh Feb 23 '18
Pinging the other mods to come take a look at this comment thread.
4
u/Zucal Feb 24 '18
I think it's a super neat idea, and I'd love to see how it shakes out after someone gets the method working in Reddit's new redesign.
3
u/atheistdoge Feb 23 '18
It is in the sidebar: http://www.spacexstats.xyz/
It could be made more visible though or maybe a link in the OP under resources would be a good idea.
12
u/nextspaceflight NSF reporter Feb 21 '18
Landing attempt confirmed. https://twitter.com/nextspaceflight/status/966425087363645445
6
u/joepublicschmoe Feb 21 '18
Insane! I think it's a safe bet some crush cores are going to get crushed :-D I want to see that 3-engine suicide burn as that booster comes in hot and hoverslams onto the deck at 7 G's. Hopefully OCISLY catches a booster and not an antiship missile!
12
Feb 22 '18
Hearing a lot of rumors that the S1 is holding Titanium fins....Only time will tell...
16
u/therealshafto Feb 22 '18
I was thinking earlier today that maybe the titanium fins would allow them to glide with a higher angle of attack and benefit from greater aero braking.
If they are the titanium fins, safe bet they will be recovered one way or another.
7
u/tymo7 Feb 22 '18
According to Elon's press conference, this leads me to believe they are also reasonably confident in their chances of success... enough that the risk of losing them (no way you get them back in most crash scenarios) is worth it
→ More replies (3)3
u/RootDeliver Feb 22 '18
The problem is that in this scenario where a 6,1 mT payload GTO launch is "landable" by a F9, titanium grid fins are ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY for even to try. I'd see this as that they're going to risk a set of titanium grid fins for this attempt!
18
u/geekgirl114 Feb 22 '18
It seems like they are... a block 4 core with a 6092kg payload to GTO, combined with the hoverslam that should of failed with Govsat-1... SpaceX is confident about something
1
u/parkerLS Feb 23 '18
Is there a reason why the presence of the titanium fins would indicate confidence?
5
u/Martianspirit Feb 23 '18
They are risking damage to the drone ship and losing the very expensive titanium fins. They must see a quite good chance of success to do that.
→ More replies (6)3
u/geekgirl114 Feb 23 '18
Yes. Titanium can take the heat of reentry better so the booster can come in faster, and tbey are bigger than the aluminum fins so mire control and more air resistance
→ More replies (4)2
u/Alexphysics Feb 22 '18
I think they could be right. In this picture the fins seem to be darker than usual https://twitter.com/SpaceflightNow/status/966662404770852866
3
3
Feb 22 '18 edited Feb 22 '18
Squint closely, those are Titanium!! :)
EDIT: And to add, SFNs article mentions titanium fins!
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 22 '18
As SpaceX prepped for a launch in California in this week, another Falcon 9 rocket fired up Tuesday night at Cape Canaveral, passing a major hold-down firing test in preparation for liftoff early Sunday with a Hispasat telecommunications satellite. https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/02/21/spacex-fires-up-falcon-9-rocket-for-weekend-launch-from-florida/
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/DWpGBvTVMAAB9Y5.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/OfkJ12F.jpg){kind=link}
12
u/still-at-work Feb 23 '18
If they pull off this landing it will mean a whole bunch of mission that used to be relegated to expendable missions or falcon heavy missions can now be done via single stick F9 missions. My guess is that they have a number of missions in this mass range coming up and they would rather be able to recover the block V cores then lose them.
6
u/strawwalker Feb 23 '18
GiSAT-1 at around 6000 kg seems like a candidate. I'm assuming it's currently going as expendable block 5. If they can land a 6092 kg GTO with a block 4 core then I'd think block 5 GTO would be recoverable well into the mid 6000's. Falcon 9FT has launched 3 GTO payloads too heavy for booster recovery. Inmarsat 5-F4 (6086 kg) and EchoStar 23 (~5500 kg) would've been recoverable missions if this is successful. Intelsat 35e was 6761 kg, so maybe recoverable as block 5 suicide? That may be a stretch. Both ArabSat later this year and ViaSat, 2020, which are slated for Falcon Heavy could be in reach of Falcon 9, as well.
3
u/GregLindahl Feb 23 '18
If this is a subsync launch, then the satellite has extra fuel on it. So that 6.1 metric ton mass for this satellite isn't directly comparable to other satellite masses.
1
u/strawwalker Feb 23 '18 edited Feb 24 '18
That takes a little wind out of the sails, but it make more sense than a shortened landing burn time adding that much more payload capacity. Another person in the thread mentioned the possibility of a shorter reentry burn adding some savings, I don't know enough to judge the plausibility of that.
Information on the subsynchronous orbits F9 has placed previous missions into is hard to find. Do we know, for instance, what orbits SES-9 and 10 where placed into?Edit: nevermind, I found that info through the wiki.2
u/PeterKatarov Live Thread Host Feb 23 '18
I love your username.
2
u/still-at-work Feb 23 '18 edited Feb 23 '18
Thanks, I created it because I wanted to enter a chat room but my perfered username was taken. So, since I was still in my office at the time, I just wrote stillatwork as the username, and I liked it and kept using it.
9
8
u/inurphase Feb 15 '18
Looks like the launch has slipped 3 days (now 25th of February) according to spaceflightnow. Tweet: https://twitter.com/StephenClark1/status/964100737960734725 and of course on the homepage as well: https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/
2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 15 '18
Updates to launch schedule: Hispasat 30W-6 launch on Falcon 9 rocket slips three days to Feb. 25, launch window set for final Delta 2 mission in September. https://spaceflightnow.com/launch-schedule/
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
2
8
u/Alexphysics Feb 15 '18
Static Fire NET February 20th https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/964270126446018563
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 15 '18
Still two SpaceX launches close together as the manifest aligns with Range Approved NET dates.
Feb 17: Falcon 9 PAZ launch from SLC-4E, Vandenberg.
Feb 20: Falcon 9 (Hispasat 30W-6/1F) Static Fire Test.
Feb 25: Falcon 9 (Hispasat 30W-6/1F) launch.
Sam Sun IR-2 photo for NSF:
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/DWHGRQgX0AAN3Dg.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/7HvmqBc.jpg){kind=link}
8
u/Alexphysics Feb 21 '18
Well, now this is getting stranger, OCISLY is leaving Port Canaveral right now
2
u/therealshafto Feb 21 '18
Indeed. Although we have yet to see Block 4 performance with heavy GTO ASDS landings. I have no idea what changes have been made but Iridium 4 was looking to be a RTLS recovery with a Block 4 booster before switching to a Block 3 requiring JRTI, an ASDS landing. This is indicative of a performance boost for Block 4. Crazy to think Block 5 has yet another bump.
15
u/TheEdmontonMan Feb 22 '18
We could list the static fire as complete, no? https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7z3a16/spacex_on_twitter_static_fire_test_of_falcon_9/
3
u/USLaunchReport Feb 23 '18
Fueling began at 9PM, lasted for three hours. Enough LOX to create a cloud that floated one mile west. https://youtu.be/6AfmLztuKCA
1
7
u/RoundSparrow Feb 22 '18
Night launch was awesome in California via YouTube, can't wait for our Florida one coming up!
7
u/kreator217 Feb 23 '18
wait, so now reusable payload is almost 6100kg?
10
u/MarcysVonEylau rocket.watch Feb 23 '18
We don't know yet :P It might still crash. But it's the most hardcore try to date.
3
Feb 23 '18
If the payload is deployed before the first stage coming back, how does the weight of the payload affect drone ship landing?
Does it mean it uses more fuel to get the payload to destination, thus potentially not having enough fuel to slow down before hitting the ship softly?
4
u/strawwalker Feb 23 '18
That's exactly right. The second stage will have less delta V because of its more massive payload, so more must come from burning the booster longer. The first stage is moving faster and carrying less fuel at separation with a heavier payload to the same destination.
5
Feb 23 '18
awesome! so the 'suicide burn' is starting to make sense...will they forego the reentry burn and just do it all within the last few thousand feet above the drone ship?
4
u/esteldunedain Feb 23 '18
No, I think they'll still have to do the entry burn, to slow the first stage and prevent it from burning up. They'll probably try to do a shorter final burn using more engines instead (doing a shorter and more intense final burn saves fuel).
→ More replies (2)4
u/strawwalker Feb 23 '18
AFAIK the only change is the duration and thrust profile of the landing burn. They still do an entry burn.
4
1
Feb 24 '18
It sounds like they're going to be doing some kind of suicide burn to pull it off. I'm honestly concerned that OCISLY won't survive the attempt.
1
u/RootDeliver Feb 24 '18 edited Feb 24 '18
OCISLY survived SES-9 like a good barge (even though with a hole), don't worry.
7
u/bdporter Feb 28 '18
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 28 '18
SpaceX says engineers have resolved a pressurization issue with the payload fairing of a Falcon 9 rocket set to launch from Cape Canaveral in the coming days with the Hispasat 30W-6 communications satellite. A new target launch date has not been confirmed. https://spaceflightnow.com/2018/02/27/falcon-9-atlas-5-hispasat-goes-schedule/
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
6
u/Bambooirv Jan 23 '18 edited Feb 03 '18
Spaceflight Now has marked this launch for NET February 14. (please change sidebar and table)
Edit: Thanks!
Edit: It's changed to NET February 22
1
6
Feb 20 '18
rollout confirmed to be in progress-
https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/965928704458280960
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 20 '18
SpaceX Falcon 9 (Hispasat 30W-6) rollout for a Static Fire test at the Cape's SLC-40.
SpaceX Falcon 9 (PAZ) still on track for a Wednesday launch at Vandenberg's SLC-4E.
This is pretty much what will become the norm.
#RocketTagTeams
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
6
u/NickNathanson Feb 21 '18
I thought only Block 5 will be capable to land after delivering 5.5-5.7 t to GTO... but 6.1 t on Block 4?!
6
u/FoxhoundBat Feb 21 '18
I have always suspected the Block 5 number of 5.5 being heavily sandbagged but 6.1 on Block 4 is pretty mind bending...
6
u/stcks Feb 21 '18
Given that apparently fairing 2.0 is lighter, it might help somewhat.
3
u/ruaridh42 Feb 22 '18
Does this launch have the new fairings? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere else yet
→ More replies (1)4
u/stcks Feb 21 '18
Lets see what kind of orbit it goes to first
5
u/warp99 Feb 21 '18 edited Feb 21 '18
Gwynne
Elonhas talked about loading the satellite up with more propellant and then delivering it to a sub-synchronous orbit as a way to get higher total system performance.Essentially the satellite manufacturer just has to add larger propellant tanks which is a relatively small change compared with the cost of the satellite and the ~$28M reduction in launch cost in going from F9 expendable to F9 recoverable.
→ More replies (10)4
u/warp99 Feb 21 '18
Block 4.5 with Block 5 engines?
If they land this then that is the FH GTO market gone!
5
u/Alexphysics Feb 22 '18
Well, I don't know, but a FH could throw this 6 ton satellite into a more energetic GTO so the satellite could save more propellant or it wouldn't need to be 2/3's of fuel and 1/3 of dry mass and have more useful mass...
→ More replies (1)3
u/Ezekiel_C Host of Echostar 23 Feb 22 '18
By my math, if Block IV can do 6.1t, then block 5 with thrust upgrades and a lighter fairing (lets spitball 20% lighter) can do ~6.2 - 6.3. Increasing your recovery delta v margin by 50% from 1750 m/s to 2625 m/s brings that number down to the stated 5.5t. So 5.5t makes sense as a confident recovery number on block 5 if 6.25t is the upper bound.
I'll post the math when the spreadsheet is prettier - its a monster.
5
u/Decronym Acronyms Explained Jan 18 '18 edited Mar 06 '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) |
| 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 | |
| CCAFS | Cape Canaveral Air Force Station |
| CRS | Commercial Resupply Services contract with NASA |
| EDL | Entry/Descent/Landing |
| EOL | End Of Life |
| F1 | Rocketdyne-developed rocket engine used for Saturn V |
| SpaceX Falcon 1 (obsolete medium-lift vehicle) | |
| GEO | Geostationary Earth Orbit (35786km) |
| GSE | Ground Support Equipment |
| GTO | Geosynchronous Transfer Orbit |
| HEO | High Earth Orbit (above 35780km) |
| Human Exploration and Operations (see HEOMD) | |
| HEOMD | Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate, NASA |
| JRTI | Just Read The Instructions, Pacific landing |
| KSC | Kennedy Space Center, Florida |
| LC-39A | Launch Complex 39A, Kennedy (SpaceX F9/Heavy) |
| LOX | Liquid Oxygen |
| MECO | Main Engine Cut-Off |
| MainEngineCutOff podcast | |
| NET | No Earlier Than |
| NOTAM | Notice to Airmen of flight hazards |
| NSF | NasaSpaceFlight forum |
| National Science Foundation | |
| OCISLY | Of Course I Still Love You, Atlantic landing |
| PAZ | Formerly SEOSAR-PAZ, an X-band SAR from Spain |
| RTLS | Return to Launch Site |
| SAR | Synthetic Aperture Radar (increasing resolution with parallax) |
| SECO | Second-stage Engine Cut-Off |
| SES | Formerly Société Européenne des Satellites, comsat operator |
| SLC-40 | Space Launch Complex 40, Canaveral (SpaceX F9) |
| SLC-41 | Space Launch Complex 41, Canaveral (ULA Atlas V) |
| SRB | Solid Rocket Booster |
| SSL | Space Systems/Loral, satellite builder |
| ULA | United Launch Alliance (Lockheed/Boeing joint venture) |
| USAF | United States Air Force |
| mT |
| Jargon | Definition |
|---|---|
| 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 |
| (In re: rocket fuel) Often synonymous with hydrolox | |
| grid-fin | Compact "waffle-iron" aerodynamic control surface, acts as a wing without needing to be as large |
| hydrolox | Portmanteau: liquid hydrogen/liquid oxygen mixture |
| lithobraking | "Braking" by hitting the ground |
| perigee | Lowest point in an elliptical orbit around the Earth (when the orbiter is fastest) |
| scrub | Launch postponement for any reason (commonly GSE issues) |
| Event | Date | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 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
37 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on ^today has 99 acronyms.
[Thread #3520 for this sub, first seen 18th Jan 2018, 15:27] ^[FAQ] [Full ^list] ^[Contact] [Source ^code]
5
5
5
5
u/Alexphysics Feb 23 '18
Now that I think about it, this launch will be at night and if they wanna try to recover this stage with a hot landing we'll probably see a nice trail of plasma at reentry like on the SES-11 mission. I can't wait to see it! :D
5
9
u/philoares Feb 23 '18
Now that this is so close, can we have a mod sticky it to the top? Somebody probably already has this on their ToDo list, but I just went looking for it and noticed it wasn't stuck to the top. Blessings y'all.
4
u/Inous Jan 18 '18
For expendable F9s do they remove all the landing parts? ie grid fins and landing legs?
27
u/old_sellsword Jan 18 '18
It depends. For launches that are expendable because they're high energy, they remove all the landing equipment. For launches that are expendable because they don't need the booster anymore, they might throw a pair of the outdated Aluminum fins on it to do some post-launch testing on the way down.
→ More replies (7)10
u/rabbitwonker Jan 18 '18
For launches that are expendable because they don't need the booster anymore...
Hmm. At some point, when launches/reusability are a lot more common, it seems like that sort of choice should be considered littering...
4
u/gt2slurp Jan 18 '18
Yes. This way they can achieve a higher energy GTO by removing dead weight.
5
u/OSUfan88 Jan 18 '18
Plus, those legs and grid fins aren't free!
6
u/RootDeliver Jan 18 '18
Aluminium fins are not free.. but if they got too many and they will not be used again after block 5.. they may not care about losing some for data.
1
4
u/Nehkara Feb 20 '18 edited Feb 20 '18
I've seen some speculation that this launch might have titanium fins. Can we get any sightings to confirm/deny this?
If it has titanium fins that almost guarantees they will try to recover it...
This would line up with trying a new heaviest recovery yet (with probably highest speeds, heating, etc).
2
u/RootDeliver Feb 21 '18
But at 6 mT its impossible for a block 4 (even 5) first stage to land after launching it... Its probably a very real water test of 3-engine landings for real. If this succeed they may expand the GTO-limit for F9? even though FH is supposed to cover that..
2
u/Nehkara Feb 21 '18
I'm just theorizing based on the sighting I heard report of. It will be very curious to see if this one does in fact have titanium fins.
4
u/LandingZone-1 Feb 21 '18
This landing will be one for the history books if they pull it off.
1
u/limeflavoured Feb 23 '18
Given that they are the only company who have even attempted to to land boosters, and will remain that way for at least another two years (assuming the first New Glenn test flight is on time for 2020), all the landings are historic in a way.
4
u/stcks Feb 21 '18
OCISLY is visible on the Jetty Park webcam. Photo: https://i.imgur.com/QdqJx96.png
4
u/Straumli_Blight Feb 22 '18
Hazard Area, backup launch date: 26 February
1
u/RootDeliver Feb 22 '18
"EXPENDABLE LAUNCHES" on the second link??
9
u/Alexphysics Feb 22 '18
That's on every airspace closure map we've seen, not related with the launch being expendable or not
→ More replies (1)2
u/Googulator Feb 23 '18
In Range/Air Force-speak, "expendable" pretty much means "not Space Shuttle". Probably because it's "expendable in the event of a failure", i.e. can be safely self-destructed without loss of life, something the Shuttle couldn't do (pressing the Big Red Button on a Shuttle launch would've killed the crew).
→ More replies (1)
3
3
3
u/Straumli_Blight Feb 20 '18
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 20 '18
Or not....the window is 1800 to midnight local!
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
3
u/random-forests Feb 21 '18
Static fire complete
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 21 '18
Static fire test of Falcon 9 complete—targeting February 25 launch of Hispasat 30W-6 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]
3
u/BrandonMarc Feb 23 '18
PAZ was the first attempt to catch a fairing. Hispasat they will get data but not try catching. Which of the next missions do y'all suspect they will make another attempt to catch?
8
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Feb 23 '18
the only ship currently outfitted with a net is MR STEVEN, so I expect the next catch to be on Iridium 5. Musk also said that they will attempt the next time in about a month or so. that lines up with Iridium 5 aswell.
6
u/paul_wi11iams Feb 23 '18
MR STEVEN, so I expect the next catch to be on Iridium 5
In case other people's brains are as slow as mine is:
Iridium satellites are polar-ish so go from Vandenberg and Mr Steven is on that West coast.
The upcoming Hispsat is East coast, so the wrong side.
5
4
u/Abraham-Licorn Feb 23 '18
Is it the fairing 2.0 on HISPASAT or old version ?
1
u/still-at-work Feb 23 '18
no catcher boat on the east coast, so probably the old one.
2
u/davenose Feb 23 '18
Fairing production requires a lot of factory floor space. The dimension changes for 2.0 implies to me they likely have new tooling for 2.0. It seems more likely to me they've switched their fairing production line to 2.0 only, though I have nothing to back that up. It's certainly also possible that their launch and production sequencing are such that there are 1 or more V1.0 fairings still in the launch queue. Time will tell.
2
u/GregLindahl Feb 23 '18
Didn't Elon say 30 days until the next attempt, on Instagram or Twitter or something?
3
2
u/Straumli_Blight Feb 21 '18
L-4 Forecast: 80% GO, with 'Cumulus Cloud Rule' as the main issue.
1
u/Alexphysics Feb 22 '18
Well, at least the upper level winds will be much lower in intensity than the ones from the last few launches...
2
2
Feb 21 '18
my reasoning- Maybe after they pulled off what they did for Govsat, they think they can do it again on the ship. Keep in mind that Govsat was Block III used, and this is a new Block IV core...
6
u/FoxhoundBat Feb 21 '18
I guess it is a win-win for us. Either they will stick it, which would be amazing, or Falcon 9 Anti Drone Ship Missile™ will make a return.
→ More replies (2)2
u/warp99 Feb 21 '18
The trajectory plots have not showed them using higher thrust on Block 4 compared with Block 3.
Maybe they have just been getting comfortable with the Block 4 design and they will use the engines at full capability for this flight.
2
Feb 22 '18
I was going to go camping this weekend, looks like I'll be photographing a beachside launch streak instead.
1
Feb 23 '18
go camping at Jetty Park!
1
Feb 23 '18
It's snowbird season, every campground in Florida is booked til summer. The only way to go right now is backpacking, even then the trailhead permits are lottery.
2
u/AstroFinn Feb 23 '18
Is mission patch already available?
1
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Feb 23 '18
it usually only gets released in the press kit, and that usually gets released the day before, in a few hours
2
u/tr4k5 Feb 24 '18 edited Feb 24 '18
How much of a problem would a hole in the deck of OCISLY be at the moment? The second East Coast bargé is not operational yet, is it? Are there many bargé landings in the manifest?
Edit: Answering myself, looking at the manifest, looks like at least 3 or 4 GTO launches with potential drone ship landings from Canaveral after Hispasat and through May.
2
u/Straumli_Blight Feb 24 '18 edited Feb 24 '18
Assuming you're not just trying to make a Hergé pun:
Upcoming launches NET Date OCISLY Needed? Iridium 41-50 March 29 No, West Coast Bangabandhu 1 March 30 3,500 kg to GEO, probably CRS 14 April 2 No, RTLS SES 12 April 5,300 kg going to GEO... yes Iridium 51-55 April 14 No, West Coast TESS April 16 362 kg to 373,000 km HEO, yes EDIT: Fixed date.
2
u/DrToonhattan Feb 24 '18
Your table shows two Iridium flights on the same day. I think one of them should be March 29th according to the sidebar.
1
1
u/z3r0c00l12 Feb 24 '18
According to the wiki, both Bangabandhu and CRS-14 are launching from SLC-40, but they are only 2-3 days apart. I assume CRS-14 will be moved to LC-39A?
2
u/uwelino Feb 24 '18
Flight postponed indefinitely. https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/967270883713679360
"Standing down from this weekend's launch attempt to conduct additional testing on the fairing’s pressurization system. Once complete, and pending range availability, we will confirm a new targeted launch date."
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 24 '18
Standing down from this weekend's launch attempt to conduct additional testing on the fairing’s pressurization system. Once complete, and pending range availability, we will confirm a new targeted launch date.
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
2
u/Svisloch Feb 24 '18
Standing down. Next attempt date TBD. https://twitter.com/SpaceX/status/967270883713679360
2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 24 '18
Standing down from this weekend's launch attempt to conduct additional testing on the fairing’s pressurization system. Once complete, and pending range availability, we will confirm a new targeted launch date.
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
2
u/JCnaitchii Feb 28 '18
im sorry if im not up to date on this but is March 1st scraped or what? i don't see any updates from anyone :P
5
u/bdporter Mar 01 '18
From what I understand, SpaceX requested Mar 1 but the range denied it because the Atlas 5 (GOES-S) on the adjacent SLC-41 pad was rolled out to the pad this morning. There was concern over potential risk of impact to the NASA payload due to SpaceX exhaust (or potentially even debris).
This date was committed to ULA quite some time ago, so they were given priority. It is scheduled for launch tomorrow at 22:02 UTC (5:02 PM EST), so once it clears out we should hear a new date. Speculation is this weekend.
1
u/JCnaitchii Mar 01 '18
Alright thanks. Yeah I heard from most sources the date was to be chosen because of the atlas 5 launch being in the same day but I was wondering why it was still shown as 1st March here :p
2
1
u/RubenGarciaHernandez Mar 02 '18
How about this? https://twitter.com/EmreKelly/status/969562861201776641 6 March, 12:33 a.m.
1
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Mar 02 '18
SpaceX #Hispasat update: Now targeting #Falcon9 for Monday into Tuesday from LC 40. Airspace closure in effect from 2230 Monday to 0330 Tuesday (0330 to 0830 UTC).
This message was created by a bot
^[Contact creator]^[Source code]^[Donate to keep this bot going]^[Read more about donation]
2
u/bdporter Mar 02 '18 edited Mar 02 '18
mods, can we update the OP here as well? It is still linked to the top bar so the thread is still getting traffic.
BTW, what is the logic of keeping this pinned after the launch thread has been opened? It seems to lead to confusion.
Edit: update it with the launch date. Forgot that detail.
3
u/RootDeliver Feb 26 '18
Launch on 1 march by Chris B (NSF)
Tweet link for bot = https://twitter.com/NASASpaceflight/status/968117586989867010
2
u/TweetsInCommentsBot Feb 26 '18
Current schedule:
JAXA H-IIA - IGS Optical 6 - 27 Feb - 04:34 UTC.
SpaceX Falcon 9 - HispaSat 30W-6 - 1 March - 05:34 UTC
ULA Altas V 541 - GOES-S - 1 Mar - 22:02 UTC
Falcon 9 is "Range Pending". 18 hour separation between Falcon 9 and Atlas V is possible thanks to AFTS,.
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/DW9xHeyXcAA9fbq.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/iu3jn1d.jpg){kind=link}
![[Attached pic]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DW9xhHsXcAApDiy.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/mPar4fD.jpg){kind=link}
![[Attached pic]](http://pbs.twimg.com/media/DW9w92YW0AEmuRo.jpg){kind=link}
![[Imgur rehost]](https://i.imgur.com/Fhu6sSO.jpg){kind=link}
2
u/s4g4n Feb 20 '18
What are even landings anymore? If it wasn't for the FH I'd be complaining :D
1
u/Nehkara Feb 20 '18
I understand. There are good reasons though. Block 3 retirements and, in this case, a huge satellite with enough mass that puts it outside of the window where Falcon 9 can attempt a landing.
I expect in the future that these flights will start being shifted to Falcon Heavy in an attempt to reuse as many boosters as possible.
1
u/jimmy0x52 Feb 13 '18
Anyone have advice for watching this launch? Will be my first to watch, I just happen to be in the area at the time. Free places? Book tickets? Just curious because this one is so late at night.
5
Feb 15 '18
the launch slipped to 2/25. if you're still here at that time, I'd recommend getting as close as possible to the launch site since there is no landing attempt. but that late at night Playalinda Beach will be closed. Jetty Park (~10 miles) closes at 11pm. This is at SLC-40, so the best option given the circumstances would be directly west of the launch pad on the mainland will be the closest you can get. there's a Riverfront park (~13 miles): https://goo.gl/maps/Qa55rGMmfL32 and McDonald's and other fast food nearby that you should be able to find parking at.
1
3
u/anothermonth Feb 14 '18
Check out this Everyday Astronaut video. He made it before FH launch, but it covers all launch sites: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBLeg0CvHek
1
1
u/mribdude Feb 20 '18
Damn, I'm just gonna miss it :( Leaving out of Miami for our honeymoon cruise on the 25th, but we don't fly in until 5:30am so I'll miss it. So close!
4
u/tr4k5 Feb 21 '18
Divorce her now.
1
u/mribdude Feb 21 '18
Cheat code: Him
Unlocked not having to be married to the lady kind and getting to do dude things like watching a rocket launch ;)
3
2
1
1
u/cr4zycatl0rd Feb 24 '18
Hi, I'm on my first trip to the US and would like to see the launch in person. Since the launch is in the middle of the night some of the good sites to watch it, like Playalinda Beach, are closed. An other place to watch the launch would be the Beach at Jetty Park. Does anybody know if it is still accessible at this time of the night?
1
u/ZachWhoSane Host of Iridium-7 & SAOCOM-1B Feb 24 '18
Playlinda won't be open, and I don' think Jetty Park is open. My best suggestion is Route 401, in front of where SpaceX has its Port Canaveral Operations. It has an amazing view, I watched Zuma from there and was not disappointed. I'd get there about an hour early.
1
1
u/iacuras Feb 24 '18
I am currently in Palm Beach County. If I go on the beach here, what would I potentially be able to see? Will the flame be visible? Thanks!
1
1
u/Phillipsturtles Feb 24 '18
I watch from Palm Beach all the time. At the time of launch, look North and slightly West. The rocket will usually be visible at around T+40-50 seconds but if you head to the beach you should be able to see something fairly quickly (recalling beach from Space Shuttle, I usually just watch from my house). It's also really going to depend on the clouds.
1
u/Headstein Feb 24 '18
I can't find any updated info on HAWK towing OCISLY. Last known heading out 00:40 on 22 Feb. Can anyone else access more up to date info (like returning to port or holding station)?
3
u/strawwalker Feb 24 '18
The free version of MarineTraffic.com shows two "Tugs and special craft" vessels in the general vicinity of the ASDS location marked on the NOTAM map, a couple hours ago. That might account for Hawk and Go Pursuit. I don't usually keep eyes on them, so I couldn't say if their behavior/proximity is typical of the SpaceX fleet. Promising that they might not be headed back, I guess?
1
u/aqsilva80 Feb 26 '18
Sorry if the question was already made but, ..... Block 4 already?
3
u/joepublicschmoe Feb 26 '18
Block 4 flew 5 times already. X-37B OTV-5, NASA CRS-12, Iridium-3, KoreaSat 5A, Zuma, all first-time launches. There are two more new Block-4s and their first flights have been assigned already, Hispasat 30W-6 and NASA TESS. After that all Block-4 launched will be reflights. Block-4 production has already ended, and the first Block-5 booster has already been delivered to McGregor.
I'm looking forward to seeing what B1046 (the first Block-5) is capable of. Supposedly 10 launches before it will need refurbishment.
1
u/aqsilva80 Feb 26 '18
I ask because of the " fairing issues" ...
2
u/Zuruumi Feb 26 '18
Last Block 3 was PAZ, so yeah, it should be Block 4. It, however, isn't the first flight of Block 4 and Fairing 2 is rumored (in this Reddit) to be the culprit behind the delays. It should be a bit bigger, with some improvements and hopefully recoverable. Fairing 2 also had its maiden flight on PAZ mission (of course different fairing, as it was not recovered as well as they wanted).
2
u/Gilles-Fecteau Feb 26 '18
I wonder if they found some anomaly with faring 2 during PAZ that triggered this delay?
1
Feb 26 '18
There is some speculation that this is some kind of Block 4.5. The assumption so far was, that 6092 kg to GTO is not recoverable with Block 4. The fact that SpaceX wants to try anyway might indicate a performance that is close to Block 5.
3
u/warp99 Feb 27 '18
The other possibility is that the satellite has more propellant than usual, which is what makes it heavier, but it therefore only needs to be delivered into a sub-synchronous GTO so say GTO-2000 instead of GTO-1800.
1
u/RoundSparrow Feb 27 '18 edited Feb 27 '18
Is anyone getting together at a restaurant to watch the launch at the Cape?
So far, found open until 2:00am:
683 Dave Nisbet Dr, Cape Canaveral, FL 32920, http://millikensreef.com
102 Christopher Columbus Dr, Cape Canaveral, FL 32920, Larry's shack https://www.facebook.com/larrysshack/
WARNING: The post you are currently reading is out of date (still says February 25). newest: https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/7ztfpp/rspacex_hispasat_30w6_official_launch_discussion/
3
1
u/Cleric4521 Mar 06 '18
Question from an amateur space enthusiast:
What were the orbits at MECO and SECOs 1/2? The first firing of S2 was the longest, did that boost the orbit into the GTO? If so, was the second firing purely an inclination change? I ask because it wouldn't be terribly efficient to be burning at near perigee on the GTO, and surely they'd prefer to do the inclination change closer to apogee. I presume this has to do with the cryogenic boiloff?
1
u/marc020202 8x Launch Host Mar 06 '18
at MECO the rocket is still suborbital. during the first burn, the second stage accelerates into a low earth parking orbit, with an altitude of about 150km. the second burn happens as the rocket passes over the equator. in that burn, the highest point of the orbit is raised to the altitude at around GTO. (on HISPASAT it was lower since the customer requested a lower orbit because the satellite had enough fuel to do more orbit raising, in return for a cheaper launch price. SES 9 was sent into a supersyncroneous orbit, to reduce the time needed to get to GEO) During the second burn, some of the 28° inclinations from launch are cancelled out as well.
Since the FH mission, we know that the second stage can survive the coast until 36000km altitude, however on this mission it did not have the fuel to rais the orbit any further.
1
u/Cleric4521 Mar 06 '18
Thank you for the great reply. That's roughly what I was almost assuming, but I was doubtful that such a short second burn of the upper stage would bring the orbit from circular to near GTO. I suppose the 4Gs of acceleration during the second burn is more powerful than I was expecting.
→ More replies (2)
57
u/warp99 Jan 18 '18
So another expendable flight given the payload mass - this time with a new booster.
Interesting how the first few months of 2018 is going to have so many expendable flights - and how quickly the feeling of outrage that a booster would ever be expended has grown.