NASASpaceFlight.com Forum

SpaceX Vehicles and Missions => SpaceX Early Days Archive Section => Topic started by: Helodriver on 08/25/2014 08:05 pm

Title: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 08/25/2014 08:05 pm
I'd previously posted updates to SpaceX activities at SLC-4 under the General and Heavy sections where they seem to get buried rather quickly, hence the new standalone topic.

A trip around SLC-4 yesterday shows some visible progress being made since earlier this summer. The transporter/erector is back outside near the launch stand for the first time in months, but not attached to the pad.

New large white painted structures are mounted to the left the launch stand, but the hold downs are still not yet installed after their removal late last year.

The biggest news is that heavy equipment is now positioned at SLC-4W, the abandoned Titan-2 launch pad, and demolition of that structure is beginning. This in preparation for leveling the site for landings and is another confirmation of revelations made back in April.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 08/25/2014 08:15 pm
It was a warm day, lots of heat shimmer in the pics. Not as clear as I'd like.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: catdlr on 08/25/2014 08:33 pm
It was a warm day, lots of heat shimmer in the pics. Not as clear as I'd like.

You did great Helodriver, it's either too hot or to foggy there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Garrett on 08/25/2014 09:03 pm
Nice photos.
Do you (or somebody else) have a link to those "revelations made back in April."? Can't remember seeing anything explicit.

Looking at your photos and comparing with Google satellite imagery, I'm presuming you took the photos from the south east of the pad, probably from Tank Road?

What is the next most probable launch from Vandenberg  - CONAE or Jason-3? I see multiple sources (JPL, CNES) citing March 2015 as the launch period for Jason-3.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: abaddon on 08/25/2014 09:19 pm
What is the next most probable launch from Vandenberg  - CONAE or Jason-3? I see multiple sources (JPL, CNES) citing March 2015 as the launch period for Jason-3.

Next most probable launch is the Dragon 2 in-flight abort test: http://spacexstats.com/upcoming.php (and other sites, that's the first one I found).
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Mongo62 on 08/25/2014 09:38 pm
Do you (or somebody else) have a link to those "revelations made back in April."? Can't remember seeing anything explicit.

They are in L2. They include a lot of information about future plans for the Vandenberg launch site. Among the items disclosed at that time was the intended demolition of SLC-4W for a future landing pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/17/2014 12:52 pm
SpaceX continues to make progress on preparing for the demolition of the Mobile Service Tower at SLC-4W to make way for the landing facility.

The tower has been rolled from its park site where it has been abandoned in place since the last Titan II flight in 2003 into position over the launch mount. This will be the final time it is ever moved before explosives drop it to the ground.

A level of internal structure has been removed above the tower base exposing the support beams which will be cut for toppling back toward the park site. Workers are also welding the wheels in place to prevent motion during the explosive cut.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/18/2014 06:50 am
A source who works on base said they tried to drop the tower today with 5 charges and it didn't fall. They will try again tomorrow.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: J-V on 09/18/2014 08:49 am
Does the TE now have room for three cores? I.e. FH.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 09/18/2014 08:53 am
Does the TE now have room for three cores? I.e. FH.

The first post on this page shows a picture the TE for FH, with 3 cradles on top.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: J-V on 09/18/2014 08:55 am
Does the TE now have room for three cores? I.e. FH.

The first post on this page shows a picture the TE for FH, with 3 cradles on top.

That's what I was talking about. I just wasn't certain if those were clamps for F9 or positions for side boosters. Is this the first sighting of such TE?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: JBF on 09/18/2014 10:56 am
Does the TE now have room for three cores? I.e. FH.

The first post on this page shows a picture the TE for FH, with 3 cradles on top.

That's what I was talking about. I just wasn't certain if those were clamps for F9 or positions for side boosters. Is this the first sighting of such TE?

The TE at Vandenberg has always been sized for 3 cores.  That's not 3 cradles at top, it's one cradle with 2 clamping arms.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim_LAX on 09/18/2014 12:51 pm
Looking closely at that first picture at the top I see that the TE runs on rubber tires.  I thought the TE in Florida used steel rails.  Wondering if tires give them some needed stearability.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 09/18/2014 01:03 pm
Looking closely at that first picture at the top I see that the TE runs on rubber tires.  I thought the TE in Florida used steel rails.  Wondering if tires give them some needed stearability.

Or perhaps FL already had rail installed?  Installing rail isn't cheap, and maybe they decided they didn't really need it when tires would do.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/18/2014 02:05 pm
In Florida they used existing rails. In California, the route from their hangar to the pad traverses a slope and a turn and there was no infrastructure already built.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/18/2014 09:53 pm
The world's last intact launchpad for Titan family rockets was leveled today to make way for the Falcon Booster landing pad today at Vandenberg AFB. The Pad supported numerous Atlas and Titan types for over 40 years.

After an unsuccessful multi hour attempt yesterday, the Mobile Service Tower was pulled down today by heavy machinery and cables, rather than explosives as was previously expected. Multiple attempts were made to gain enough purchase to pull down the tower, weakened by cutting torches, before it came down slightly before 1:00 PM PDT.

Video linked here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYpDwS7HgEk&feature=youtu.be (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYpDwS7HgEk&feature=youtu.be)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 09/18/2014 10:16 pm
Nice video and that's a great way to get around the forum filters :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 09/18/2014 10:42 pm
Thanks for the great video and pictures! :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/19/2014 03:43 pm
A shot from the other side.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: wannamoonbase on 09/19/2014 04:04 pm
A shot from the other side.

That photo is simply epic!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Chris Bergin on 09/19/2014 04:06 pm
Great video. Potty mouth friend! ;D
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: R7 on 09/19/2014 05:49 pm
Potty mouth friend! ;D

Someone missed the money shot: "Son of a BLEEP ... MotherBLEEP ... been sitting here all BLEEP morning and I didn't get it"  :D :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/19/2014 06:18 pm
Potty mouth friend! ;D

Someone missed the money shot: "Son of a BLEEP ... MotherBLEEP ... been sitting here all BLEEP morning and I didn't get it"  :D :D

It took much longer than expected, I was out there about 4 hours, they had trouble getting it to fall, then it went all of sudden with little warning. The guy next to me had put his camera down. Oops  :P
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: dglow on 09/19/2014 06:37 pm
A shot from the other side.

Incredible! They even made a videogame about it...    ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: abaddon on 09/19/2014 07:51 pm
Actually, that looks like a sequel... Titanfall II.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/19/2014 08:30 pm
Well it seems that someone at SpaceX likes my photo work. Check out the pic I shot of CASSIOPE on the pad last year and then the link. Coincidence? I think not ;)

http://shop.spacex.com/tshirts/f9-te-t-shirt.html (http://shop.spacex.com/tshirts/f9-te-t-shirt.html)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: ugordan on 09/19/2014 10:06 pm
Actually, if you look at the T/E perspective distortion in their image, it suggests it was taken from much closer in than yours was. Something closer up like this one:
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/19/2014 11:16 pm
Hence the ;) in my original post.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 10/06/2014 04:26 am
In preparation for the inflight Dragon Abort test SpaceX begins to return SLC-4E to flight status as 3 of 4 launch holddowns are re-installed on the launch deck after a year long interval of pad repair, modifications, and upgrades. The hardware is being returned to the same apparent configuration as was used for the CASSIOPE flight, with no evidence as yet for Heavy specific additions.

Demolition of the fallen MST at SLC-4W to make way for the landing pad continues with over half of the steel structure removed or disassembled for scrapping.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: woods170 on 10/06/2014 10:53 am
In preparation for the inflight Dragon Abort test SpaceX begins to return SLC-4E to flight status as 3 of 4 launch holddowns are re-installed on the launch deck after a year long interval of pad repair, modifications, and upgrades. The hardware is being returned to the same apparent configuration as was used for the CASSIOPE flight, with no evidence as yet for Heavy specific additions.

Demolition of the fallen MST at SLC-4W to make way for the landing pad continues with over half of the steel structure removed or disassembled for scrapping.
Thanks for keeping the updates coming Helodriver. Much appreciated!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: CardBoardBoxProcessor on 10/06/2014 12:01 pm
Was the pad that damaged? And from what? Just the rocket?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 10/06/2014 01:25 pm
Was the pad that damaged? And from what? Just the rocket?

An engineering consultant source tells me that the CASSIOPE launch produced far more damage than was expected, wrecking a lot of the plumbing and cabling on the pad and necessitating months of rework.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 10/16/2014 06:10 am
SLC-4, after months of slow progress has been a hive of SpaceX activity. Demolition of the old Titan II structures continues with most of the MST chopped apart and hauled off site and only the Launch Umbilical Tower still standing for not much longer.

On 15 October the first of three large new LOX tanks that have been stored in a parking lot near the pad for over a year was was lifted onto a self propelled wheeled transporter and brought up to the pad itself in preparation for installation adjacent to the original LOX tanks. When all three are in place on their waiting concrete foundations, LOX capacity at the pad will be double what it was before. This is the first visible change of the site so far in preparations for the Heavy.

The Transporter Erector was also parked outside and was an active jobsite, with workers welding on additional steel blast shield plates along the bottom inside of the erector.

Finally a heavy flatbed truck arrived bearing a curious new low profile towing type vehicle on its back . Unsure of its role, but possibly something for moving horizontal rockets stages around. Parked far away, I never got the clearest shot.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: woods170 on 10/16/2014 06:23 am
Great update Helodriver! Thanks for posting.  :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AncientU on 10/16/2014 02:47 pm
Incredible update!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 10/17/2014 02:43 am
Great pics!  I love sb2.jpg.  "No smoking within 50 ft" right behind the hold downs.   ;D  I'm sure they're a safe distance away, it's just a funny juxtaposition.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 10/25/2014 03:30 pm
Construction and demolition activity continues at SLC-4, with visible progress made since last week.

The 4th and final hold down has been reinstalled on the launch stand, returning it to its operational configuration.

All three new LOX tanks are in place adjacent to the original three. Plumbing work continues to link them to the system.

SLC-4W's long standing fixed Launch Umbilical Tower has been pulled down, and is in the process of being cut apart.

All traces of the Mobile Service Tower have been removed from the site. Grading work for the landing pad should be beginning shortly.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Coastal Ron on 10/25/2014 03:43 pm
In the picture from 10/16, what is SB1.jpg showing?  It looks like some form of erector, but I thought the Transporter Erector for the Falcon Heavy was just slimmer (it has to fit underneath the Falcon Heavy).

I guess I'm not up to date with what the new launch infrastructure is going to be...
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 10/25/2014 03:49 pm
Photo SB1 shows the bottom of Vandenberg's T/E. Built to handle the Heavy variant, it is a much larger and more robust piece of hardware than the T/E at the Cape.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MTom on 10/25/2014 08:19 pm
Here you find a photo of T/E from 2013.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jdeshetler on 10/26/2014 03:02 am
Is that a new Payload Processing Hanger in the rear of HIF at Helodriver's lower photo?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 10/26/2014 03:41 am
Is that a new Payload Processing Hanger in the rear of HIF at Helodriver's lower photo?

Yes, but it isn't "new". I believe Helodriver posted this image about a year ago, when it was under construction:
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 11/05/2014 06:43 pm
Latest batch of images from the ongoing work at SLC-4.

The T/E has been moved from its outdoor parking position, moved to the pad and mated to the launch stand for the first time in over a year. The lower portion of the T/E has been painted where workers were welding plates last week.

SLC-4W demolition is nearing completion with only minor cleanup now ongoing. All major scrap steel is gone from the site, leaving a clear view of the flat areas that will become the landing pad. Landing pad specific construction is not yet evident.

Clear air and cooler temps afforded a blur free view of the launch stand hold downs and of the French flag that has replaced the California state flag that had been flying in front of the onsite buildings. The reason for the flag swap is unknown.

Industrial size chilling units have been delivered to the site but not installed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 11/05/2014 06:47 pm

Clear air and cooler temps afforded a blur free view of the launch stand hold downs and of the French flag that has replaced the California state flag that had been flying in front of the onsite buildings. The reason for the flag swap is unknown.


The French are providing Jason-3, the next launch
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 11/05/2014 06:50 pm
Still quite a lot of vertical hazards at the landing site.  I'd expect to see those light towers come down.

I wonder if there are matching chiller units sitting at LC-40 or LC-39A at the Cape?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 11/05/2014 10:08 pm
It seems likely to me the chillers are for air conditioning of the payload inside the fairing. I'm not certain what was used on the CASSIOPE mission last year.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 11/26/2014 12:30 am
Activity at Vandenberg's SLC-4 continues with most of the focus being on the TE this week.  The TE is attached to the launch mount in full horizontal position while the upper part of the structure is painted. Good stable air led to blur free views of the launch mount and some of the TE hardware from different angles than available previously.

Removal of the last of the SLC-4W demolished structure is complete. Landing pad construction seems to be imminent, with some plowing and soil work having been completed.

Preliminary excavation and soil work is taking place near the RP-1 tanks, possibly for the construction of foundations to host additional RP-1 tankage as was recently completed for LOX storage to support the Heavy variant.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: HIP2BSQRE on 11/26/2014 12:49 am
How long do you think it will take to the site ready for another launch? Landing pad for what?  The first launch of the heavy is scheduled for Florida, when do you think the pad will be ready to launch the heavy?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 11/26/2014 01:04 am
How long do you think it will take to the site ready for another launch? Landing pad for what? The first launch of the heavy is scheduled for Florida, when do you think the pad will be ready to launch the heavy?

Landing F9 stages and FH boosters.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: darkenfast on 11/26/2014 03:39 am
Helodriver, thanks once again for these pics of the activity at Vandenberg.  Just out of curiosity, how far away from the pad are you when you take these?  Also, is that a main rail line running by there and if so, do they stop trains during launch periods?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 11/26/2014 03:45 am
That is the main north south coastal Union Pacific train line that runs through the base property. Riding the Amtrak trains that share these tracks is one of the best tours of Vandenberg's launch facilities you can get. within 20 minutes the active launchpads SLC-8, SLC-6, SLC-4, SLC-3E and SLC-2W come into view. Train traffic is stopped during launch windows as the 30th Space Wing has direct contacts with track operator U.P.'s control center.

Most of my imagery is taken from 100 yards to 1/2 mile away depending on the angle I'm trying to get.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 11/26/2014 04:05 am
Wonderful pictures as always, Helodriver! :)

(Although you could probably scale down some of those most extreme digital zooms, since they are scaled up quite a bit - I'm surprised your camera scales up instead of storing a crop. What camera do you use?)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 11/26/2014 04:34 am
Wonderful pictures as always, Helodriver! :)

(Although you could probably scale down some of those most extreme digital zooms, since they are scaled up quite a bit - I'm surprised your camera scales up instead of storing a crop. What camera do you use?)

I believe that's all analog noise you're seeing, Lars.  The air is shimmering.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 11/26/2014 04:34 am
Sony HX-200V. My go to big zoom in a small package travel camera.  Love these.

http://www.cnet.com/products/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-hx200v-black/ (http://www.cnet.com/products/sony-cyber-shot-dsc-hx200v-black/)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 11/26/2014 04:37 am
Wonderful pictures as always, Helodriver! :)

(Although you could probably scale down some of those most extreme digital zooms, since they are scaled up quite a bit - I'm surprised your camera scales up instead of storing a crop. What camera do you use?)

I believe that's all analog noise you're seeing, Lars.  The air is shimmering.

Almost all the blur seen in these images is heat shimmer. Its very apparent at higher zoom levels due to the distances being shot, especially on sunny days when the ground is heated and cool air is blowing onshore. I rarely use digital zoom.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 11/26/2014 04:58 am
Wonderful pictures as always, Helodriver! :)

(Although you could probably scale down some of those most extreme digital zooms, since they are scaled up quite a bit - I'm surprised your camera scales up instead of storing a crop. What camera do you use?)

I believe that's all analog noise you're seeing, Lars.  The air is shimmering.

Almost all the blur seen in these images is heat shimmer. Its very apparent at higher zoom levels due to the distances being shot, especially on sunny days when the ground is heated and cool air is blowing onshore. I rarely use digital zoom.

Ok, my mistake then. I thought for sure that this was digital zoom after seeing it at 100%: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=35480.0;attach=622684;image

Looks like a neat camera. I'm more of a DLSR (w/ long zoom lens) guy, but that would be a lot heavier and might arise some suspicion. :D
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 11/26/2014 07:22 am
Can Falcon 9 share launch pad with Falcon Heavy?So only 1 launch pad or 2 same launch pads is/are needed at Boca Chica launch site.

They can share the same pad. The VAFB pad in the pictures above is wide enough to handle the three cores of a FH, even if all the hardware to support it is not yet installed. (see image below)

The KSC Pad 39A and Boca Chica will both have similar pad arrangement, capable of both F9 and FH. (The difference being that 39A will also have a crew access and vertical payload integration tower)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: nimbostratus on 11/26/2014 08:02 am
The significance is that only 1 launch pad is needed at Boca Chica launch site.

While VAFB doesn't have many launches, the launch pads can also reduced to 1.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 11/26/2014 11:10 am
Has anyone had a good look at the TE base to see if there are holes (plugged) for the Heavy side boosters or if that base is specific to only the F9?  I'm wondering if SpaceX might end up having two bases, one for heavy and one for standard, and then swap the TE mast between them.  Since the mast leans back anyway it has to be connected by just a few hinges so it shouldn't be too difficult to swap them around and this would make switching between vehicles easier than having to unbolt plugs and move the mounts around the base.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 11/26/2014 12:54 pm
Train traffic is stopped during launch windows as the 30th Space Wing has direct contacts with track operator U.P.'s control center.

The trains haven't stopped in the past.  The launches are held for train passage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jet Black on 11/26/2014 01:14 pm
Wonderful pictures as always, Helodriver! :)

(Although you could probably scale down some of those most extreme digital zooms, since they are scaled up quite a bit - I'm surprised your camera scales up instead of storing a crop. What camera do you use?)

I believe that's all analog noise you're seeing, Lars.  The air is shimmering.

someone really needs to work on an adaptive optics system for cameras! (I guess there would be objections to the equivalent of the laser guide star though!)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 11/26/2014 01:48 pm
Train traffic is stopped during launch windows as the 30th Space Wing has direct contacts with track operator U.P.'s control center.

The trains haven't stopped in the past.  The launches are held for train passage.

Not on any of the launches I've worked. When I flew the UH-1s on range security we would see them stopped right before the Jalama creek bridge if northbound and near Casmalia if southbound. right near the base boundaries. Trains were stopped no less than an hour before T-0.

Given the vagaries of train schedules vs narrow launch windows and the expense of recycling countdowns I never saw trains win that conflict. Its not a huge issue, with the low Vandenberg launch rate for all vehicles and the handful of trains that pass through the base on any given day, the odds of any particular train being delayed significantly are astronomically low. After launch, the trains are immediately allowed to proceed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 11/26/2014 01:53 pm
Train traffic is stopped during launch windows as the 30th Space Wing has direct contacts with track operator U.P.'s control center.

The trains haven't stopped in the past.  The launches are held for train passage.

Not on any of the launches I've worked. When I flew the UH-1s on range security we would see them stopped right before the Jalama creek bridge if northbound and near Casmalia if southbound. right near the base boundaries. Trains were stopped no less than an hour before T-0.

Given the vagaries of train schedules vs narrow launch windows and the expense of recycling countdowns I never saw trains win that conflict. Its not a huge issue, with the low Vandenberg launch rate for all vehicles and the handful of trains that pass through the base on any given day, the odds of any particular train being delayed significantly are astronomically low. After launch, the trains are immediately allowed to proceed.

May the rules have changed from the past.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Dudely on 11/27/2014 01:10 pm
Can Falcon 9 share launch pad with Falcon Heavy?So only 1 launch pad or 2 same launch pads is/are needed at Boca Chica launch site.

They can share the same pad. The VAFB pad in the pictures above is wide enough to handle the three cores of a FH, even if all the hardware to support it is not yet installed. (see image below)

The KSC Pad 39A and Boca Chica will both have similar pad arrangement, capable of both F9 and FH. (The difference being that 39A will also have a crew access and vertical payload integration tower)

Is it just me, or is that T/E damn pretty?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 12/23/2014 10:37 pm
SpaceX continues to prepare Vandenberg's SLC-4 as the world's first self contained VTVL spaceport.

A collection of new imagery of activities, taken 22 December 2014

While nothing as large and visibly dramatic as knocking down an old launch tower has taken place since the last update, something potentially game changing has become visible in the construction on SLC-4E. The new chilling units which were delivered earlier in the fall, and at the time I surmised were for cooling of payloads on the pad have instead been installed along with a network of new piping by the existing RP-1 tanks. I believe this to be possibly the first hard evidence of chilling RP-1 fuel for the  long rumored propellant densification on SpaceX launches. (Image AX1) Additional large cooling units have been delivered and are visible in the background uninstalled.

The new liquid oxygen tanks which were installed in the fall are also still being plumbed into the system with new pipes being mounted but not yet fully connected to the tanks (AX2)

Overall the launch stand is still missing some of its deck plating and the T/E has been pulled back slightly away from the mount. (AX3)

The permanently mounted helium storage railcars appear to have a new line run from them as well (AX4).

The four launch holddowns have all had their upper actuator reinstalled since last month. (AX5)

Image AX6 shows the overall state of SLC-4E as of late December.

Aside from the laying of some anti erosion soil stabilization rolls, not much activity is currently occurring at the future landing pad area, since the completion of demolition of the old Titan II towers. (AX7)

The payload processing addition to the HSF has a new temporarily covered area of construction grafted into its side as well as new HVAC ducting installed by a local contractor. (AX8)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 12/23/2014 11:31 pm
I wonder if there are matching chiller units sitting at LC-40 or LC-39A at the Cape?

Called it!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 12/24/2014 10:16 am
I wonder if there are matching chiller units sitting at LC-40 or LC-39A at the Cape?

Called it!
Can you link to that?

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cartman on 12/24/2014 11:33 am
...
Aside from the laying of some anti erosion soil stabilization rolls, not much activity is currently occurring at the future landing pad area, since the completion of demolition of the old Titan II towers. (AX7)
Thank you Helodriver for your very informative update! A few questions: Where are they planning to land, somewhere on the right side of the image? Is the cement surface on the left large enough or capable?

And secondly, SpaceX seems have about 3-5 missions on the manifest for Vandenberg this year plus the in-flight abort. Is their current rate of activity a sign that they are preparing for that?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: mtakala24 on 12/25/2014 12:22 pm
I don't know if this is a right thread, but its been difficult to get a big picture of future SpaceX launches from Vandenberg. What is launching in 2015 and 2016? Anything during the summer/early autumn?

with a certain interest of a launch to high-inclination orbit with a huge number of cubesats onboard.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MTom on 12/25/2014 03:52 pm
You find the SpaceX Vandenberg launches in Salo's schedule.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=8184.msg1301960#msg1301960
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Arb on 12/25/2014 07:20 pm
I don't know if this is a right thread, but its been difficult to get a big picture of future SpaceX launches from Vandenberg. What is launching in 2015 and 2016? Anything during the summer/early autumn?

Interesting question (mods kindly move if in wrong thread). Salo's latest schedule shows:

2015
March 31   - Jason-3
September  - SAOCOM-1A
late       - Iridium Next Flight 1 (x10)
late       - Iridium Next Flight 2 (x10)
TBD        - FORMOSAT 5
2nd half   - Itasat-1 (piggybacked)

2016
September  - SAOCOM-1B
TBD        - Iridium Next Flight 3 (x10)
TBD        - Iridium Next Flight 4 (x10)
TBD        - Iridium Next Flight 5 (x10)

2017
first half - Iridium Next Flight 6 (x10)
midyear    - Iridium Next Flight 7 (x10)

2018
July       - Radarsat C-1, Radarsat С-2, Radarsat С-3
TBD        - OHB SARah satellite (x2) (or 2019)

2019
TBD        - Astrium active SARah satellite, TBD


All on Falcon 9 v1.1

So up to 6 (six) in 2015 or a launch every two months on average. That's surprisingly many.

Edit: Tidy table + spelling.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Owlon on 12/25/2014 11:42 pm
I don't know if this is a right thread, but its been difficult to get a big picture of future SpaceX launches from Vandenberg. What is launching in 2015 and 2016? Anything during the summer/early autumn?

Interesting question (mods kindly move if in wrong thread). Salo's latest schedule shows:

2015
March 31   - Jason-3
September  - SAOCOM-1A
late       - Iridium Next Flight 1 (x10)
late       - Iridium Next Flight 2 (x10)
TBD        - FORMOSAT 5
2nd half   - Itasat-1 (piggybacked)


Itasat-1 is a secondary payload, so up to five launches. Still a lot!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: darkenfast on 12/26/2014 02:18 am
Helodriver, thanks once again for the great photos!  There's a fairly large metal building seen in the background of the launch pad from your usual vantage point.  It has two peaked roofs and flagpoles and palm trees in front.   The telephoto always makes it appear dangerously close to the pad (I know it's further away).  Is that part of the SpaceX operation?  Just curious.  I assume it's evacuated at launch, but it made me wonder what sort of procedures they have to make sure there are no people in the buildings. Lists, like for fire-drills?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 12/26/2014 03:22 am
Part of that building dates from the Titan days on SLC-4E. It has been expanded over time but sits a bit less than 500 feet from the launch stand. It is a non reinforced building used as office space and equipment and tool storage. I would think that there is a very thorough personnel accountability system on launch day, since it has actually been damaged by a launch accident before.

The 1986 Titan 34D explosion on the site put some good size holes in it, but left it standing. Not a place I'd want to be during launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 12/26/2014 05:13 am
I wonder if there are matching chiller units sitting at LC-40 or LC-39A at the Cape?

Called it!
Can you link to that?

Cheers, Martin
Well, I meant that I'd been right about the chillers being for propellant densification, which I seem to recall had only been discussed in the context of the Cape previously.  From my mobile I can't do a decent search of the forums to find those earlier rumors.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 12/26/2014 09:54 am
The new chilling units which were delivered earlier in the fall, and at the time I surmised were for cooling of payloads on the pad have instead been installed along with a network of new piping by the existing RP-1 tanks. I believe this to be possibly the first hard evidence of chilling RP-1 fuel for the  long rumored propellant densification on SpaceX launches. (Image AX1) Additional large cooling units have been delivered and are visible in the background uninstalled.

Many thanks for this. Great info, as always.

So, this hardware is on the RP-1 feed.

Is there any evidence of hardware to subcool the O2? I guess it would be very different from an RP-1 cooler. (Previous NASA experiments involved boiling vats of LN2, so perhaps the first signs would be massive storage for LN2.)

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/26/2014 01:16 pm
If oxygen is about the same price as nitrogen, you might as well just pull a vacuum on the oxygen. With that method you can subcool it all the way to the melting point, 55-60 K.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 12/26/2014 01:58 pm
Helodriver, thanks once again for the great photos!  There's a fairly large metal building seen in the background of the launch pad from your usual vantage point.  It has two peaked roofs and flagpoles and palm trees in front.   The telephoto always makes it appear dangerously close to the pad (I know it's further away).  Is that part of the SpaceX operation?  Just curious.  I assume it's evacuated at launch, but it made me wonder what sort of procedures they have to make sure there are no people in the buildings. Lists, like for fire-drills?

Pad support building.  For hazardous ops, there is a badge board where only certain people are allowed in and they leave a safety badge at the access point and are assigned an access badge.  These can be done manually or electronically.  The manual method is easier during a problem.  All the badges can taken to the emergency evacuation point and a head count can be made.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: baldusi on 12/26/2014 04:54 pm
I calculated something like 5% to 8% to GTO. But it didn't included the effect of reduced T/W. Since Merlin 1D has tome margin, they might be doing the two thing simultaneously (increased thrust plus densification). It could put F9 at 5.4 to 1,800m/s GTO and 4.1tonnes to a 1,500m/s GTO.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 12/26/2014 06:53 pm
The new chilling units which were delivered earlier in the fall, and at the time I surmised were for cooling of payloads on the pad have instead been installed along with a network of new piping by the existing RP-1 tanks. I believe this to be possibly the first hard evidence of chilling RP-1 fuel for the  long rumored propellant densification on SpaceX launches. (Image AX1) Additional large cooling units have been delivered and are visible in the background uninstalled.

Many thanks for this. Great info, as always.

So, this hardware is on the RP-1 feed.

Is there any evidence of hardware to subcool the O2? I guess it would be very different from an RP-1 cooler. (Previous NASA experiments involved boiling vats of LN2, so perhaps the first signs would be massive storage for LN2.)

Cheers, Martin


Not certain what a LOX chiller would look like, but these two trailer mounted devices were brought to the pad in late May of this year. They were painted white and then installed next to the launch stand in July. They were not  on site for the CASSIOPE launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 12/26/2014 07:01 pm
Trailer-mounted units would let them get built and debugged at MacGregor (or possibly Hawthorne), and then brought to the pad and brought into production?  What other reason would there be for building hardware on a trailer (assuming that this is in fact densification hardware)?

EDIT: another thought: maybe they've subcontracted out to another company for the densification work, and their deliverables are trailer-mounted for easier transport to the end customer.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 12/26/2014 08:07 pm
Densification is applicable to LUX and not RP-1.  Actually heating the RP-1 provides more of a benefit
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 12/26/2014 08:09 pm
Hawthorne would not have the capability to operate any chillers with cryogens
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/26/2014 08:18 pm
Densification is applicable to LUX and not RP-1.  Actually heating the RP-1 provides more of a benefit
You can do both. Also, heating of RP-1 wouldn't provide more of a benefit if your engine is already temperature-limited (especially if you're doing regenerative cooling).
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: ArbitraryConstant on 12/26/2014 08:33 pm
Would densification allow increased thrust from constant volumetric but greater mass flow rate?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: sublimemarsupial on 12/26/2014 09:15 pm
Densification is applicable to LUX and not RP-1.  Actually heating the RP-1 provides more of a benefit

SpaceX clearly disagrees with you given their newly installed RP chillers as seen in helodriver's recent update.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 12/26/2014 09:16 pm
Densification is applicable to LUX and not RP-1.  Actually heating the RP-1 provides more of a benefit

SpaceX clearly disagrees with you given their newly installed RP chillers as seen in helodriver's recent update.

How do we know they are chillers?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 12/26/2014 11:17 pm
Densification is applicable to LUX and not RP-1.  Actually heating the RP-1 provides more of a benefit

SpaceX clearly disagrees with you given their newly installed RP chillers as seen in helodriver's recent update.

How do we know they are chillers?

Jim does have a point, we have no external confirmation. Based on my experience working with construction engineers, the equipment installed looks like very much like self contained industrial size chilling units. It is also plumbed into the RP-1 tanks and a new line leading from those tanks to the pad.  I suppose that the units could be run as heat exchangers to warm the fuel, but given that the climate at SLC-4 never goes below freezing, its unlikely. All the literature I'm familiar with dealing with petroleum based fuels, in particular jet fuel in aircraft I've flown, give a small performance advantage if the fuel is cooler and denser, plus a few % more can be carried in the tanks.

A photo from a few weeks ago of an uninstalled unit is included to show the scale.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 12/26/2014 11:46 pm
Based in its appearance and size and tapered leg design. It looks like a large scale KMG model condenser unit manufactured by the Dectron company. Commonly used for sealed dry cooling of fluids and industrial processes.

Their catalog is attached. Page 19 is relevant.

http://www.dectron.com/pdf/DectronAirCooledCon.pdf (http://www.dectron.com/pdf/DectronAirCooledCon.pdf)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Bob Shaw on 12/26/2014 11:46 pm
If your climate is agreeable, RP-1 densification seems like a no-brainer. Low cost, and first stage efficiency improvements where they matter most.

Not sure about Florida, though, where it can be rather warm and terribly humid, leading to all sorts of unwanted results.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 12/27/2014 02:51 am

Jim does have a point, we have no external confirmation. Based on my experience working with construction engineers, the equipment installed looks like very much like self contained industrial size chilling units. It is also plumbed into the RP-1 tanks and a new line leading from those tanks to the pad.  I suppose that the units could be run as heat exchangers to warm the fuel, but given that the climate at SLC-4 never goes below freezing, its unlikely. All the literature I'm familiar with dealing with petroleum based fuels, in particular jet fuel in aircraft I've flown, give a small performance advantage if the fuel is cooler and denser, plus a few % more can be carried in the tanks.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5118.msg969147#msg969147
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Robotbeat on 12/27/2014 03:43 am

Jim does have a point, we have no external confirmation. Based on my experience working with construction engineers, the equipment installed looks like very much like self contained industrial size chilling units. It is also plumbed into the RP-1 tanks and a new line leading from those tanks to the pad.  I suppose that the units could be run as heat exchangers to warm the fuel, but given that the climate at SLC-4 never goes below freezing, its unlikely. All the literature I'm familiar with dealing with petroleum based fuels, in particular jet fuel in aircraft I've flown, give a small performance advantage if the fuel is cooler and denser, plus a few % more can be carried in the tanks.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5118.msg969147#msg969147
Total energy isn't the only figure of merit. After all, engines are often run fuel-rich, usually (in the case of kerosene engines) to help with the temperature (of course, with hydrolox engines, running fuel rich also gives you quite an improvement in Isp), so I don't think it can be assumed that adding more energy automatically improves your performance if you're temperature constrained. It must certainly depend on your engine cycle.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: sublimemarsupial on 12/27/2014 05:30 am


Jim does have a point, we have no external confirmation. Based on my experience working with construction engineers, the equipment installed looks like very much like self contained industrial size chilling units. It is also plumbed into the RP-1 tanks and a new line leading from those tanks to the pad.  I suppose that the units could be run as heat exchangers to warm the fuel, but given that the climate at SLC-4 never goes below freezing, its unlikely. All the literature I'm familiar with dealing with petroleum based fuels, in particular jet fuel in aircraft I've flown, give a small performance advantage if the fuel is cooler and denser, plus a few % more can be carried in the tanks.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=5118.msg969147#msg969147
Total energy isn't the only figure of merit. After all, engines are often run fuel-rich, usually (in the case of kerosene engines) to help with the temperature (of course, with hydrolox engines, running fuel rich also gives you quite an improvement in Isp), so I don't think it can be assumed that adding more energy automatically improves your performance if you're temperature constrained. It must certainly depend on your engine cycle.

Agree. SpaceX is likely already running with the combustion chamber inlet temperature (post regen circuit) as close to coking temperature as possible, so increasing the fuel temp pre regen circuit would only serve to force the engine to run at a worse mixture ratio by decreasing the heat the regen circuit can reject to the fuel. It seems to me the ISP loss from the changing the mixture ratio would outweigh any total energy gains from bulk heating the fuel. Conversely, by chilling the fuel you can actually run the engine closer to stoichiometric than it is currently, and that gain stacks with the small stage mass fraction gain you get from the improved density.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: S.Paulissen on 12/27/2014 06:00 pm
Densification is applicable to LUX and not RP-1.  Actually heating the RP-1 provides more of a benefit

This is interesting.  For the life of me I cannot figure out why this is, short of preventing the kerosene from solidifying.  Since Vandenberg/KSC never reaches the approximate -40C required to freeze RP-1 I don't understand how warming would help. 

Assumptions in my head:
-Regenerative heating would benefit by allowing slightly higher combustion temps with a couple C more deltaT to play with.

-Mass fraction improves with a few percent more kerosene contained in the same tankage.

-Combustion would be benefited by running more stoichiometric ratio because a hotter flame for slightly better ISP.  I can see how a lower fraction of lower mass reactants (lower C-H to O ratio) decreases exhaust velocity with higher O2 fraction in combustion.  Is the merlin 1d really riding the slightly-rich optimum so perfectly that the hotter flame is a net negative with the increased O2 fraction?  This seems at odds with warmer is better.  Is it not relatively easy to re-ratio for the colder RP-1 and accept only the increased mass fraction? 

As stated before, it would seem from your statement that warmer RP-1 would be better because they’re running too fuel rich as it is, warmer would lean out combustion.  Am I wrong in believing that it isn’t too difficult to increase O2 ratios to the point that flame temp goes up just enough to take advantage of the extra cooling, thus making cooler still better when mass fraction is taken into account?

Obviously I'm missing some vital piece of information or undervaluing the effect of higher mass oxygen in the exhaust gases or under-appreciating the difficulty of re-tuning the O/F ratio for fold RP-1.   Jim, can you clue me in on what I'm missing?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: John-H on 12/28/2014 03:14 am
Chilling the fuel?  Or just conditioning it so it always has a standard temperature?  After a hot day in the sun, the fuel could be warmer than usual, and there would be less in the tank.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 12/28/2014 06:44 am
These tanks are most definitely the RP-1 tanks and have been in place since the pad was renovated for SpaceX operations. New LOX tanks were brought out late last year, stored on site and then mounted on the pad this fall, but not in the RP-1 area.

As far as ambient fuel temperatures go, with the tanks being insulated, painted white, and exposed to the year round fog laden ocean breezes on that hillside I would be very surprised if the fuel in those tanks ever gets much above 60 degrees F. The weather here is much more coolly temperate and stable than any SpaceX experiences at any of their other current or future launch sites.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: hrissan on 12/28/2014 10:46 am
Chilling the fuel?  Or just conditioning it so it always has a standard temperature?  After a hot day in the sun, the fuel could be warmer than usual, and there would be less in the tank.
Perhaps stable temperature is more important than specific temperature (so that engine parameters are the same and more easy to compare). But if you start conditioning, you are free to select the optimal temperature.

For Angara the kerosene is chilled to -15 celsius (5 fahrenheit), in Angara documentary this is explained as "more fuel will fit in the tank".

If this is simplification for general public, nontheless it is quite natural that between frozen fuel and very hot fuel there should exist optimum point. :)

it can depend on emgine design, or may be the design (or fine-tuning) can be tailored to specific temperature?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 01/10/2015 02:57 am
Now that the Environmental Assessment for SpaceX's use of LC-13 as a landing pad has been published we have some idea of what SpaceX envisions a landing pad to look like: 

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=36513.msg1312415#msg1312415


Helodriver, in the future be on the lookout for preparation work for a couple of "contingency pads" around the main landing pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: ravedave on 01/10/2015 04:35 am
Well there is no doubt they are subcooling now. From Elon's ama:

"With sub-cooled propellant, I think we can get the Falcon 9 upper stage mass ratio (excluding payload) to somewhere between 25 and 30. Another way of saying that is the upper stage would be close to 97% propellant by mass."

https://www.reddit.com/comments/2rgsan/slug/cnfs7zz
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 01/10/2015 05:11 am
Well there is no doubt they are subcooling now. From Elon's ama:

"With sub-cooled propellant, I think we can get the Falcon 9 upper stage mass ratio (excluding payload) to somewhere between 25 and 30. Another way of saying that is the upper stage would be close to 97% propellant by mass."

https://www.reddit.com/comments/2rgsan/slug/cnfs7zz

Yeah.  I tried to get him to confirm it by linking the pics from this thread, but no luck.  He didn't reply to me.   :'(
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cambrianera on 01/11/2015 02:04 pm
Googling a little for Jet propellant:
Jet A freezing point -40 C°
Jet A-1 freezing point -47 C°
Jet B freezing point -60 C°

RP-1 should be similar to Jet A-1.

Per deruch spec sheet below, similar to Jet A
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 01/11/2015 10:49 pm
Googling a little for Jet propellant:
Jet A freezing point -40 C°
Jet A-1 freezing point -47 C°
Jet B freezing point -60 C°

RP-1 should be similar to Jet A-1.

Here's NASA's spec sheet (.pdf) (http://propellants.ksc.nasa.gov/commodities/RP1.pdf) on RP-1 which lists freezing temp of -36 oF
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 01/13/2015 01:34 am
Getting slightly off topic here, but I came across this formula for determining the density of RP-1 at various temperatures:

pF = 50.41 -[0.026(TF -60) + 0.290(API -43.5)]

where:

pF= Fuel density (lb/ft3)
TF= Fuel temperature (oF)
API= American Petroleum Institute gravity (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/API_gravity) (degrees) [related to the specific gravity of petroleum products; from linked spec sheet in reply #106, NASA's accepted range for RP-1 is 42.0 to 45.5]

It's from this paper:
Analysis of RP-1 Fuel Density For Operational Atlas Missiles (.pdf) (http://atlasbases.homestead.com/Analysis_of_RP-1_Fuel_Density_-_SAWE0323.pdf)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 01/17/2015 02:43 am
Did a little scouting of the ongoing activities at SLC-4 Wednesday 15 Jan. Lots of different jobs being actively worked this day. One potentially major development was spotted for the first time.

New earthworks and a new road are being dug in on the end of the HIF away from the launch stand. (b1)

The launch mount was getting attention from workers, with some of the actuators that were formerly assembled now taken apart and exposed. (b2)

The RP-1 tanks (b3) and the newly installed fuel cooling units (b4) are still being plumbed into the pad's systems.

New high pressure metal tanks of currently unknown purpose have been delivered to the pad (b5)

The new LOX tanks are still under active plumbing work (b6)

Many workers and others were on the launch stand, it seems as there was a tour of the facilities going on, with some of the individuals taking pictures. (b7)

New concrete pouring and concrete form work is taking place to the north side of the flame duct. An area that had been a sloping surface down into the flame trench is being shored up, filled and leveled, creating a new reinforced flat space next to the duct. This might have something to do with the as yet unconfirmed rumor that SpaceX is planning to build a lightweight rotating service structure on SLC-4E to provide vertical integration for certain DOD payloads. Further attention will be paid to this area over time. (b8)

I had to fly out of Santa Barbara to San Francisco on Thursday and the airliner passed over Vandenberg South Base at around 22 thousand feet, providing a nice if not particularly detailed, high angle view of the pad. (b9)

SLC-3, SLC-4, and SLC-6 and SLC-8 are visible lined up along the coast of the base looking southwards. (b0)

No new activity on the landing facility since the last update (c)

SLC-4 area overview (b)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cosmicvoid on 01/17/2015 02:55 am
Did a little scouting of the ongoing activities at SLC-4 Wendesday 25 Jan.

Nice update!  How did you manage togo into the future?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 01/17/2015 03:12 am
New earthworks and a new road are being dug in on the end of the HIF away from the launch stand. (b1)

What is the censored building beyond the rise in the mid-ground?  Is this part of the HIF mentioned in the caption for image b1?  Or something else?

Thank you for these updates!

Zubenelgenubi
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 01/17/2015 03:12 am
Good work Helo, as always!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 01/17/2015 04:21 am
New earthworks and a new road are being dug in on the end of the HIF away from the launch stand. (b1)

What is the censored building beyond the rise in the mid-ground?  Is this part of the HIF mentioned in the caption for image b1?  Or something else?
>

Looks like the HIF high bay
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: whitelancer64 on 01/18/2015 06:40 pm
New earthworks and a new road are being dug in on the end of the HIF away from the launch stand. (b1)

What is the censored building beyond the rise in the mid-ground?  Is this part of the HIF mentioned in the caption for image b1?  Or something else?

Thank you for these updates!

Zubenelgenubi

it's not censored, just that side of the building is in shadow, and so is very uniform in color. the full size image shows detail the preview image does not.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: zubenelgenubi on 01/18/2015 09:32 pm
New earthworks and a new road are being dug in on the end of the HIF away from the launch stand. (b1)

What is the censored building beyond the rise in the mid-ground?  Is this part of the HIF mentioned in the caption for image b1?  Or something else?

Thank you for these updates!

Zubenelgenubi

it's not censored, just that side of the building is in shadow, and so is very uniform in color. the full size image shows detail the preview image does not.

Copy that!  I now see the tan section sports a vertically paneled surface, when viewing the opened image, no zoom.  The gray surface, to me, when I opened and moderately zoomed the image, still almost completely hides its vertically paneled surface.

A good example of the subtleties of optics and perception!

Also, there appears to be a crescent moon just off the upper right hand corner of the building!

(I like spotting celestial objects in landscape imagery, day or night.)

Thanks,
Zubenelgenubi
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 01/29/2015 06:24 pm
Visited SLC-4 while on base placing remote cameras for the Delta II SMAP launch.

Some new activity in preparation for the next launch was noted. I also gained access to a new viewing perspective of the launch stand.

The launch hold downs have received new armor plate coverings for their exposed upper surfaces. (n1) This is in line with reports I heard that the CASSIOPE launch did quite a bit more damage to the pipes and plumbing of the pad, requiring a rethink of design.

The fuel cooling equipment looks more fully installed. Blue tarps cover certain pieces. (n2)

The gripper arms of the T/E have been removed. (n3)

A new view of the launch mount directly from the east provides additional hardware detail and site layout (n4) (n7)

Another large high pressure tank has been delivered on site bringing the total to three. (n6) These tanks are placarded for helium (n5) but appear to be used equipment being re-purposed by SpaceX. A similar previously installed tank can be seen in picture (n1) placarded for high pressure compressed gaseous nitrogen.

My theory is that these new tanks will be installed adjacent to the first and used as GN2 storage for the three cores of the Heavy variant. The ongoing concrete work near the flame duct visible in (n1) is most probably to prepare the area support these new tanks.



Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 01/29/2015 07:20 pm
Thanks for the great pictures!

Visited SLC-4 while on base placing remote cameras for the Delta II SMAP launch.
The launch hold downs have received new armor plate coverings for their exposed upper surfaces. (n1) This is in line with reports I heard that the CASSIOPE launch did quite a bit more damage to the pipes and plumbing of the pad, requiring a rethink of design.

Here is a comparison with an earlier picture of yours, from the same angle that shows the new armor plates.

EDIT: That armor was added to SLC-40 from the beginning, and seems to have worked well. I've added a picture from the Thaicom launch to that shows it:
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: mhlas7 on 01/30/2015 02:47 am
When is SLC-4 going to be upgraded to support Falcon Heavy? Do they even have any heavy launches for Vandenberg on the manifest?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Tomness on 01/30/2015 03:13 am
When is SLC-4 going to be upgraded to support Falcon Heavy? Do they even have any heavy launches for Vandenberg on the manifest?
Already in progress with re-mods after it's last launch. It was sposed to do FH Demo but they have someone that wants east coast launch for FH Demo. SLC-4 FH is for Air Force launches when ever they can win a contract. Only other payloads SLC-4 FH  would be using FH excess margines and dog leg for geo & leo launches. If they could do it & range aproval.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 01/30/2015 03:55 am
When is SLC-4 going to be upgraded to support Falcon Heavy? Do they even have any heavy launches for Vandenberg on the manifest?


The Transporter/Erector, launch stand, and hangar were sized to support the Heavy from the outset. Modifications are ongoing to bring other systems such as propellant, nitrogen, and the launch holddowns up to the Heavy specification.

Future work I have been told is in the pipeline involves a vertical rotation service gantry to support DOD payload integration.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: mhlas7 on 01/30/2015 04:03 am

When is SLC-4 going to be upgraded to support Falcon Heavy? Do they even have any heavy launches for Vandenberg on the manifest?
Future work I have been told is in the pipeline involves a vertical rotation service gantry to support DOD payload integration.

I suspected DOD as no one else needs payloads that heavy in high inclination orbits. The hold down appears to only support one core now, do you know when it might change to support 3?

Very interesting about the vertical integration. Could your source reveal any more details on the design of service gantry?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lobo on 01/30/2015 04:56 pm
Did a little scouting of the ongoing activities at SLC-4 Wendesday 25 Jan.

Nice update!  How did you manage togo into the future?

Yes.  Very cool.  Thanks Helo!

Looks like the old Titan MSS at SLC-4W has been removed? Wasn't it there for the F9v1.1 debut launch?  Don't think I've seen any pics of the pads since then.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AncientU on 01/30/2015 05:30 pm
Visited SLC-4 while on base placing remote cameras for the Delta II SMAP launch.

Some new activity in preparation for the next launch was noted. I also gained access to a new viewing perspective of the launch stand.

The launch hold downs have received new armor plate coverings for their exposed upper surfaces. (n1) This is in line with reports I heard that the CASSIOPE launch did quite a bit more damage to the pipes and plumbing of the pad, requiring a rethink of design.

The fuel cooling equipment looks more fully installed. Blue tarps cover certain pieces. (n2)

The gripper arms of the T/E have been removed. (n3)

A new view of the launch mount directly from the east provides additional hardware detail and site layout (n4) (n7)

Another large high pressure tank has been delivered on site bringing the total to three. (n6) These tanks are placarded for helium (n5) but appear to be used equipment being re-purposed by SpaceX. A similar previously installed tank can be seen in picture (n1) placarded for high pressure compressed gaseous nitrogen.

My theory is that these new tanks will be installed adjacent to the first and used as GN2 storage for the three cores of the Heavy variant. The ongoing concrete work near the flame duct visible in (n1) is most probably to prepare the area support these new tanks.

Thanks for the recon!

Looks like the T/E truss structure is still 'naked' unlike the animation.  Wonder if this truss can handle a covering or if a new article will be needed (of course, assuming that covering the truss is in the plans).
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 01/31/2015 06:18 am
Did a little scouting of the ongoing activities at SLC-4 Wendesday 25 Jan.

Nice update!  How did you manage togo into the future?

Yes.  Very cool.  Thanks Helo!

Looks like the old Titan MSS at SLC-4W has been removed? Wasn't it there for the F9v1.1 debut launch?  Don't think I've seen any pics of the pads since then.

Go back a few pages in this thread. ;)  Helodriver has been giving regular updates (close to monthly) that have included the work done at SLC-4W.  And yes.  It was removed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 01/31/2015 08:31 am
Another large high pressure tank has been delivered on site bringing the total to three. (n6) These tanks are placarded for helium (n5) but appear to be used equipment being re-purposed by SpaceX. A similar previously installed tank can be seen in picture (n1) placarded for high pressure compressed gaseous nitrogen.

My theory is that these new tanks will be installed adjacent to the first and used as GN2 storage for the three cores of the Heavy variant. The ongoing concrete work near the flame duct visible in (n1) is most probably to prepare the area support these new tanks.

Many years ago, NASA performed a test of LOX sub-cooling. They sent the LOX through two baths of boiling N2, one at atmospheric pressure, the other at low pressure to reduce the boiling point even further.

This is obviously not applicable for the GN2 tank as described, but it will be interesting to note if/when suitable LN2 tanks are installed.

Cheers, Martin

PS many thanks for the continued updates.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: BobHk on 02/04/2015 05:18 am
http://spacenews.com/spacex-leasing-second-pad-at-vandenberg/ (http://spacenews.com/spacex-leasing-second-pad-at-vandenberg/)

SpaceX Leasing LC-4W

Quote
34°37′59″N 120°36′56″W (July 1963 – Oct 2003)

Built in 1963 as Atlas-Agena D pad for launch of KH-7 reconnaissance satellites. First designated PALC2-3. Upgraded to a Space Launch Complex (SLC) in 1966. Rebuilt 1965–1966 for Titan IIIB with various military payloads. Began launching Titan 23/24B (Titan III core rocket) also Titan 34B MOL core rocket with Agena upper stage in 1971–1987. Modified to accommodate former LGM-25C Titan II ICBMs for space launch vehicles (Titan IIG), 1988. Inactivated in 2003 with last Titan IIG expended. 93 Launches

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 02/04/2015 08:19 am
If SN read Chris's articles they wouldn't have to guess what's going on there ;)

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: woods170 on 02/04/2015 01:21 pm
If SN read Chris's articles they wouldn't have to guess what's going on there ;)


Yeah, the SN article is a bad case of really old news.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lobo on 02/04/2015 11:08 pm
Did a little scouting of the ongoing activities at SLC-4 Wendesday 25 Jan.

Nice update!  How did you manage togo into the future?

Yes.  Very cool.  Thanks Helo!

Looks like the old Titan MSS at SLC-4W has been removed? Wasn't it there for the F9v1.1 debut launch?  Don't think I've seen any pics of the pads since then.

Go back a few pages in this thread. ;)  Helodriver has been giving regular updates (close to monthly) that have included the work done at SLC-4W.  And yes.  It was removed.

Ahhh... I had looked back a few pages, but hadn't gone back that far.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 02/05/2015 01:42 am
Testing out more new vantage points of SLC-4E and taking advantage of stable cool shimmer free air before the marine layer rolled in off the ocean. New progress visible in multiple areas of the pad compared to just a few days ago.

m1: Newly armored launch holddowns have been moved into the retracted position and both tail servicing arms have been reinstalled.

m2: The new LOX storage tanks have been plumbed into the system and it appeared valve testing was going on with venting occurring occasionally.

m3: Oblique view of the launch mount with holddowns retracted. Of particular interest, a flag with the Dragon spacecraft's logo was flying over the pad admin building, the first I've ever seen that emblem here. Until recently the French and California state flag had been alternation on this pole.

m4: Demolition of Titan era concrete has increased next to the flame trough. This is the area surmised to be the mounting point for the new GN2 tanks.

m5: Proposed landing area at SLC-4W remains unchanged. An interesting rumor, not from a SpaceX'er but an Air Force friend mentioned the possibility of it being reconstructed as a second SpaceX launch facility. This is unconfirmed but of potentially great interest. Not sure what that would mean for the landing site plans, which as of yet shows no progress other than the removal of the old Titan MST.

m6: Low angle view of the work next to the flame trough. Not visible to the right where the old Titan IV MST used to park, a great deal of demolition of old concrete around the park site is also taking place to make way for unknown new construction.

m7, m7a: New deck level view of the launch stand from due south, and a full view including a look straight into the flame duct.

m8: Further LOX vapor venting from the new tank plumbing. First such activity noticed around the new installation. Also

m9: Closest view yet of the unknown purpose trailer mounted canisters west of the launch stand.

m10: Marine layer nearby the pad coming off the ocean.

m11: Marine layer just a few minutes later obscures the site for the day. Sometimes the clear window can be as little as an hour at this site or not at all.

m12: Another of the unknown trailer canister units is now parked in a storage yard a mile or so from SLC-4.

m13, m14: Closer view of the canister unit. The SpaceX pad mounted ones are now painted white, but they were like this unit at first, apparently prior used. The only identifying information is the paper tag on one of the fittings reading "oxidizer component"
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: BobHk on 02/05/2015 02:39 am
Thanks for the amazing photos.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 02/05/2015 02:47 am
the latter are likely N2O4 scrubbers
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 02/05/2015 03:55 am
the latter are likely N2O4 scrubbers

As far as I'm aware the only use SpaceX has for nitrogen tetroxide is the Dragon capsule, and the only planned flight of Dragon at Vandenberg is the inflight abort test. For only one flight involving not a lot of N2O4, compared say the Titans that used to inhabit this pad, its interesting that SpaceX would install so much vapor scrubbing capacity.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/05/2015 06:06 am
... An interesting rumor, not from a SpaceX'er but an Air Force friend mentioned the possibility of it being reconstructed as a second SpaceX launch facility...

*if* this turns out to be true, maybe a "fast pad" for rapid turn around and "new age" type payloads that require minimal integration, and a "classic pad" for defense and other large/sensitive payloads?

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 02/05/2015 06:12 am
... An interesting rumor, not from a SpaceX'er but an Air Force friend mentioned the possibility of it being reconstructed as a second SpaceX launch facility...

*if* this turns out to be true, maybe a "fast pad" for rapid turn around and "new age" type payloads that require minimal integration, and a "classic pad" for defense and other large/sensitive payloads?

I don't see it happening. One VAFB pad should be sufficient to cover all west coast launches, even if SpaceX somehow took over all DoD launches. Which won't happen.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 02/05/2015 06:51 am
the latter are likely N2O4 scrubbers

I don't know whether this is relevant because the unit isn't one of the ones at the pad, but the fire diamond on image m12 isn't for N2O4.  N2O4 fire diamond (http://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/chemical/4075).  Though that may not be relevant for a scrubber, so take that for what you will. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MechE31 on 02/05/2015 01:26 pm
the latter are likely N2O4 scrubbers

As far as I'm aware the only use SpaceX has for nitrogen tetroxide is the Dragon capsule, and the only planned flight of Dragon at Vandenberg is the inflight abort test. For only one flight involving not a lot of N2O4, compared say the Titans that used to inhabit this pad, its interesting that SpaceX would install so much vapor scrubbing capacity.

Quite a few satellites use some form of hypers. I don't know of any of them that don't use N2O4 if it's a bi-prop system. There is some variability on the fuel.

If SpaceX starts payload processing at their facility in Vandy, they would need a scrubber.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 02/05/2015 01:43 pm
Wasn't there a recent mention that one problem delaying Dragon abort from Vandenberg would be environmental issues?

Maybe that is addressed by installing the scrubber.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 02/05/2015 01:57 pm
the latter are likely N2O4 scrubbers

I don't know whether this is relevant because the unit isn't one of the ones at the pad, but the fire diamond on image m12 isn't for N2O4.

That might be for the scrubbing liquor
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: abaddon on 02/05/2015 02:04 pm
I don't see it happening. One VAFB pad should be sufficient to cover all west coast launches, even if SpaceX somehow took over all DoD launches. Which won't happen.

I was thinking the same thing, then I remembered Iridium.  SpaceX will be launching Iridium flights from VAFB.  Quite a few in fact (seven).  Still not enough flights to warrant an extra pad... but maybe what is good for one LEO constellation is good for another, and SpaceX is planning on launching their mega-constellation from VAFB?  I could definitely see that requiring a second pad.  If you're going to launch into highly inclined orbits where else would they put a pad?  Vandenberg is really the only plausible option, right?

I still think this is really unlikely, where are they going to land returning cores?  And they need that a lot sooner than they need to be launching SpaceX satellites.

Maybe SpaceX is looking into securing permits to allow them to build a launch pad there, but 4+ years in the future.  That could be where the rumor came from.  So use it as a landing pad now, figure out different places to land in 4+ years and build the second launch pad for the SpaceX constellation.

Wild speculation, needless to say...
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/05/2015 02:34 pm
I don't see it happening. One VAFB pad should be sufficient to cover all west coast launches, even if SpaceX somehow took over all DoD launches. Which won't happen.

I was thinking the same thing, then I remembered Iridium.  SpaceX will be launching Iridium flights from VAFB.  Quite a few in fact (seven).  Still not enough flights to warrant an extra pad... but maybe what is good for one LEO constellation is good for another, and SpaceX is planning on launching their mega-constellation from VAFB?  I could definitely see that requiring a second pad.  If you're going to launch into highly inclined orbits where else would they put a pad?  Vandenberg is really the only plausible option, right?

I still think this is really unlikely, where are they going to land returning cores?  And they need that a lot sooner than they need to be launching SpaceX satellites.

Maybe SpaceX is looking into securing permits to allow them to build a launch pad there, but 4+ years in the future.  That could be where the rumor came from.  So use it as a landing pad now, figure out different places to land in 4+ years and build the second launch pad for the SpaceX constellation.

Wild speculation, needless to say...
The commX plan is for 800 sats per yr.  At (guessing) 300 kg per sat, that's 240 tons.  If not volume limited, that's over 20 F9 flights right there.  (FH will work only if they can service multiple planes per flight).   If they want to start with a functional sparser low-density constellation instead of waiting 5 years, then they'll need even less sats per plane, and so even more likely F9 (regrettably...)

If they want to start with a rapid deployment phase, then even more so.

This constellation is a money making proposition.  You can't afford, literally, to be not launching.

"ABCD"...  Always Be Counting Down...


And yes, 5 years away, but you need to plan ahead.  Maybe the pad will start life as a landing pad, and will later get converted to a launch pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: RedLineTrain on 02/05/2015 02:47 pm
Some of the less ambitious constellations may be closer than 5 years away.  SpaceX may offer an attractive price.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AncientU on 02/05/2015 02:54 pm

m10: Marine layer nearby the pad coming off the ocean.



Another great update!!! Thanks Helodriver!

The site overview before the marine layer rolled in appears to be much, much more heavily populated with infrastructure than before.  These developments aren't for a single launch abort test -- more like preparations for a major launch campaign in the not-too-distant future (IMO).
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: bstrong on 02/05/2015 02:56 pm
... An interesting rumor, not from a SpaceX'er but an Air Force friend mentioned the possibility of it being reconstructed as a second SpaceX launch facility...

*if* this turns out to be true, maybe a "fast pad" for rapid turn around and "new age" type payloads that require minimal integration, and a "classic pad" for defense and other large/sensitive payloads?

I don't see it happening. One VAFB pad should be sufficient to cover all west coast launches, even if SpaceX somehow took over all DoD launches. Which won't happen.

BFR pad? It seems to me that time is running out for them to select a site if they are planing for a launch in 5 years, and the approval process would presumably be a lot easier for building on an existing pad site they are already leasing.

I'm sure there are lots of reasons why this wouldn't work, since VAFB never seems to come up when BFR sites are being discussed, but I'm curious what they are.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/05/2015 02:58 pm
... An interesting rumor, not from a SpaceX'er but an Air Force friend mentioned the possibility of it being reconstructed as a second SpaceX launch facility...

*if* this turns out to be true, maybe a "fast pad" for rapid turn around and "new age" type payloads that require minimal integration, and a "classic pad" for defense and other large/sensitive payloads?

I don't see it happening. One VAFB pad should be sufficient to cover all west coast launches, even if SpaceX somehow took over all DoD launches. Which won't happen.

BFR pad? It seems to me that time is running out for them to select a site if they are planing for a launch in 5 years, and the approval process would presumably be a lot easier for building on an existing pad site they are already leasing.

I'm sure there are lots of reasons why this wouldn't work, since VAFB never seems to come up when BFR sites are being discussed, but I'm curious what they are.
I think the inclinations are wrong for Mars bound parking orbits.  (51° minimum)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 02/05/2015 03:15 pm

I think the inclinations are wrong for Mars bound parking orbits.  (51° minimum)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InSight
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/05/2015 03:20 pm

I think the inclinations are wrong for Mars bound parking orbits.  (51° minimum)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InSight
Interesting - do you have the trajectory detail?  Or why they are going from Vandenberg?  I mean you can go anywhere with enough dog legging, but is it an efficient trajectory?

But hey, if you're saying Vandy is an acceptable/good Mars Launch site location, I am a happy man.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: ugordan on 02/05/2015 03:25 pm
Interesting - do you have the trajectory detail?  Or why they are going from Vandenberg?  I mean you can go anywhere with enough dog legging, but is it an efficient trajectory?

It's got nothing to do with dog-legging, hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

The only drawback for interplanetary trajectories is the obvious one that holds for all other launches - you lose some benefit of Earth's rotation if you're not launching due east.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/05/2015 03:27 pm
Interesting - do you have the trajectory detail?  Or why they are going from Vandenberg?  I mean you can go anywhere with enough dog legging, but is it an efficient trajectory?

It's got nothing to do with dog-legging, hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

The only drawback for interplanetary trajectories is the obvious one that holds for all other launches - you lose some benefit of Earth's rotation if you're not launching due east.
That explains why Insight can use Vandenberg, and still make it unsuitable for parking orbits as I suggested. 

Jim - why then bring Insight as a counter example?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 02/05/2015 04:09 pm
I don't see it happening. One VAFB pad should be sufficient to cover all west coast launches, even if SpaceX somehow took over all DoD launches. Which won't happen.

I was thinking the same thing, then I remembered Iridium.  SpaceX will be launching Iridium flights from VAFB.  Quite a few in fact (seven).  Still not enough flights to warrant an extra pad... but maybe what is good for one LEO constellation is good for another, and SpaceX is planning on launching their mega-constellation from VAFB?  I could definitely see that requiring a second pad.  If you're going to launch into highly inclined orbits where else would they put a pad?  Vandenberg is really the only plausible option, right?

I still think this is really unlikely, where are they going to land returning cores?  And they need that a lot sooner than they need to be launching SpaceX satellites.

Maybe SpaceX is looking into securing permits to allow them to build a launch pad there, but 4+ years in the future.  That could be where the rumor came from.  So use it as a landing pad now, figure out different places to land in 4+ years and build the second launch pad for the SpaceX constellation.

Wild speculation, needless to say...
The commX plan is for 800 sats per yr.  At (guessing) 300 kg per sat, that's 240 tons.  If not volume limited, that's over 20 F9 flights right there.  (FH will work only if they can service multiple planes per flight).   If they want to start with a functional sparser low-density constellation instead of waiting 5 years, then they'll need even less sats per plane, and so even more likely F9 (regrettably...)

If they want to start with a rapid deployment phase, then even more so.

This constellation is a money making proposition.  You can't afford, literally, to be not launching.

"ABCD"...  Always Be Counting Down...


And yes, 5 years away, but you need to plan ahead.  Maybe the pad will start life as a landing pad, and will later get converted to a launch pad.

If SpaceX are trying to plan on significantly raising the number of launches out of VAFB, then VAFB will have to have a new environmental assessment (both SpaceX's pad and the port as a whole).  Keeping an eye out for adjusted EAs by the USAF and FAA may be a preliminary datum pointing to confirmation of SLC-4W as a second launch pad.  I'm highly skeptical but as the purest outsider, don't take my opinion for much.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/05/2015 04:10 pm
I don't see it happening. One VAFB pad should be sufficient to cover all west coast launches, even if SpaceX somehow took over all DoD launches. Which won't happen.

I was thinking the same thing, then I remembered Iridium.  SpaceX will be launching Iridium flights from VAFB.  Quite a few in fact (seven).  Still not enough flights to warrant an extra pad... but maybe what is good for one LEO constellation is good for another, and SpaceX is planning on launching their mega-constellation from VAFB?  I could definitely see that requiring a second pad.  If you're going to launch into highly inclined orbits where else would they put a pad?  Vandenberg is really the only plausible option, right?

I still think this is really unlikely, where are they going to land returning cores?  And they need that a lot sooner than they need to be launching SpaceX satellites.

Maybe SpaceX is looking into securing permits to allow them to build a launch pad there, but 4+ years in the future.  That could be where the rumor came from.  So use it as a landing pad now, figure out different places to land in 4+ years and build the second launch pad for the SpaceX constellation.

Wild speculation, needless to say...
The commX plan is for 800 sats per yr.  At (guessing) 300 kg per sat, that's 240 tons.  If not volume limited, that's over 20 F9 flights right there.  (FH will work only if they can service multiple planes per flight).   If they want to start with a functional sparser low-density constellation instead of waiting 5 years, then they'll need even less sats per plane, and so even more likely F9 (regrettably...)

If they want to start with a rapid deployment phase, then even more so.

This constellation is a money making proposition.  You can't afford, literally, to be not launching.

"ABCD"...  Always Be Counting Down...


And yes, 5 years away, but you need to plan ahead.  Maybe the pad will start life as a landing pad, and will later get converted to a launch pad.

If SpaceX are trying to plan on significantly raising the number of launches out of VAFB, then VAFB will have to have a new environmental assessment (both SpaceX's pad and the port as a whole).  Keeping an eye out for adjusted EAs by the USAF and FAA may be a preliminary datum pointing to confirmation of SLC-4W as a second launch pad.  I'm highly skeptical but as the purest outsider, don't take my opinion for much.
Good point, but those commsats have to launch out of somewhere, so something's got to budge.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 02/05/2015 04:12 pm
Interesting - do you have the trajectory detail?  Or why they are going from Vandenberg?  I mean you can go anywhere with enough dog legging, but is it an efficient trajectory?

It's got nothing to do with dog-legging, hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

The only drawback for interplanetary trajectories is the obvious one that holds for all other launches - you lose some benefit of Earth's rotation if you're not launching due east.

Right. Slightly worse performance to LEO parking orbit and less frequent launch windows are the two drawbacks with a west coast launch. Otherwise, once you are up there the delta-V for the TMI (or TLI) burn will be virtually identical.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 02/05/2015 11:36 pm


m2: The new LOX storage tanks have been plumbed into the system and it appeared valve testing was going on with venting occurring occasionally.

...

m8: Further LOX vapor venting from the new tank plumbing. First such activity noticed around the new installation. Also

m9: Closest view yet of the unknown purpose trailer mounted canisters west of the launch stand.

...

m12: Another of the unknown trailer canister units is now parked in a storage yard a mile or so from SLC-4.

m13, m14: Closer view of the canister unit. The SpaceX pad mounted ones are now painted white, but they were like this unit at first, apparently prior used. The only identifying information is the paper tag on one of the fittings reading "oxidizer component"

In 2000, NASA undertook experiments to sub-cool LO2. See http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20050203875

The equipment is described as:-

"The continuous LO2 densification production process utilizes two shell and spiral coil heat exchangers in series. Both heat exchangers employ liquid nitrogen (LN2) as the primary coolant on the shell side. The second heat exchanger is a high-efficiency, subatmospheric, LN2 boiling bath operating at 117 °R that cools the inlet LO2 propellant feed stream. A three-stage centrifugal compressor operating at cryogenic inlet conditions maintains the second heat exchanger bath vapor pressure below 3.0 psia. The LO2 propellant densification unit hardware shown in the preceding photograph has a 30-lbm/sec production capability. The system is equipped with a cryogenic LO2 recirculation pump for moving liquid from the propellant tank, into the densifier, and then back to the tank."

How likely is it that those canisters could be boiling-LN2 heat exchangers?

Could the venting even be signs that they're testing such a system?

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 02/06/2015 12:29 am
m2: The new LOX storage tanks have been plumbed into the system and it appeared valve testing was going on with venting occurring occasionally.
...
m8: Further LOX vapor venting from the new tank plumbing. First such activity noticed around the new installation. Also
m9: Closest view yet of the unknown purpose trailer mounted canisters west of the launch stand.
...
m12: Another of the unknown trailer canister units is now parked in a storage yard a mile or so from SLC-4.
m13, m14: Closer view of the canister unit. The SpaceX pad mounted ones are now painted white, but they were like this unit at first, apparently prior used. The only identifying information is the paper tag on one of the fittings reading "oxidizer component"

In 2000, NASA undertook experiments to sub-cool LO2. See http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20050203875

How likely is it that those canisters could be boiling-LN2 heat exchangers?

Could the venting even be signs that they're testing such a system?

Cheers, Martin

After looking at the two pictures of the apparatus in the paper that you linked (attached below) and seeing the industrial size of it, I think this is the only appropriate response:
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: mhlas7 on 02/06/2015 12:31 am
Interesting - do you have the trajectory detail?  Or why they are going from Vandenberg?  I mean you can go anywhere with enough dog legging, but is it an efficient trajectory?

It's got nothing to do with dog-legging, hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

The only drawback for interplanetary trajectories is the obvious one that holds for all other launches - you lose some benefit of Earth's rotation if you're not launching due east.

Right. Slightly worse performance to LEO parking orbit and less frequent launch windows are the two drawbacks with a west coast launch. Otherwise, once you are up there the delta-V for the TMI (or TLI) burn will be virtually identical.

What is the advantage then of launching into a high inclination orbit vs an equatorial orbit for an interplanetary mission? Why wouldn't you always launch equatorial in order to save fuel?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 02/06/2015 01:14 am
Interesting - do you have the trajectory detail?  Or why they are going from Vandenberg?  I mean you can go anywhere with enough dog legging, but is it an efficient trajectory?

It's got nothing to do with dog-legging, hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

The only drawback for interplanetary trajectories is the obvious one that holds for all other launches - you lose some benefit of Earth's rotation if you're not launching due east.

Right. Slightly worse performance to LEO parking orbit and less frequent launch windows are the two drawbacks with a west coast launch. Otherwise, once you are up there the delta-V for the TMI (or TLI) burn will be virtually identical.

What is the advantage then of launching into a high inclination orbit vs an equatorial orbit for an interplanetary mission? Why wouldn't you always launch equatorial in order to save fuel?

Launch site/range/overflight restrictions might prevent doing so (e.g., launching directly into an equatorial orbit is more or less impossible from any launch site not on the equator, and from a West Coast site like Vandenberg you have additional overflight concerns).
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 02/06/2015 07:53 am
the latter are likely N2O4 scrubbers

As far as I'm aware the only use SpaceX has for nitrogen tetroxide is the Dragon capsule, and the only planned flight of Dragon at Vandenberg is the inflight abort test. For only one flight involving not a lot of N2O4, compared say the Titans that used to inhabit this pad, its interesting that SpaceX would install so much vapor scrubbing capacity.

Quite a few satellites use some form of hypers. I don't know of any of them that don't use N2O4 if it's a bi-prop system. There is some variability on the fuel.

If SpaceX starts payload processing at their facility in Vandy, they would need a scrubber.

But would they need three, maybe four, of them?  Seems like overkill to me, but I don't have the faintest clue what the capacity of one of those trailer units would be.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MTom on 02/07/2015 08:29 pm
Theese unknown things (Edit:) N2O4 scrubbers mentioned earleir from Jim (/Edit) seems to have been kept mobile: they've got a newly painted trailer holding them.

The both things seems to have different role: there are two red and yellow painted plates fixed behind them - as a high-contrast visualisation .
The difference are visible in Helodriver's photo "m9" too - different pipe-layouts.

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 02/08/2015 03:10 am


m2: The new LOX storage tanks have been plumbed into the system and it appeared valve testing was going on with venting occurring occasionally.
...
m8: Further LOX vapor venting from the new tank plumbing. First such activity noticed around the new installation. Also
m9: Closest view yet of the unknown purpose trailer mounted canisters west of the launch stand.
...
m12: Another of the unknown trailer canister units is now parked in a storage yard a mile or so from SLC-4.
m13, m14: Closer view of the canister unit. The SpaceX pad mounted ones are now painted white, but they were like this unit at first, apparently prior used. The only identifying information is the paper tag on one of the fittings reading "oxidizer component"

In 2000, NASA undertook experiments to sub-cool LO2. See http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20050203875

How likely is it that those canisters could be boiling-LN2 heat exchangers?

Could the venting even be signs that they're testing such a system?

Cheers, Martin

After looking at the two pictures of the apparatus in the paper that you linked (attached below) and seeing the industrial size of it, I think this is the only appropriate response:

Perhaps we should wait and see how many of these things there are going to be.

Alternatively, the NASA experiment operated at a high flow rate, basically on the fill line. The storage tanks operate unchanged at boiling point, and sub-cooling only happens during LV operations.

What if this new system operates for a week, slowly chilling the entire contents of the storage tanks, before it is then loaded to the vehicle already pre-chilled?

The vehicle would be continuously topped off with sub-cooled prop, as warmer prop is extracted from the top of the LV's tank (which is the sub-cooled equivalent for today's venting). Top up could be from the pre-cooled fill tanks (they would need to be larger to provide the extra flow). Or, a maintenance chiller could re-chill warmed LO2, and re-inject it sub-cooled.

The major constraint on capacity of the chilling plant would be after an aborted launch, when the LV is drained of LO2 that has warmed up, and has to be re-chilled in time for the next launch window.

Given the two stage nature of NASA’s apparatus, maybe the tanks might be chilled to LN2's atmospheric boiling point (like stage one), and then go through low-vapour-pressure chilling en-route to the LV. This would also imply the same chillers would be used to keep the LV's tanks sub-cooled while it sits on the pad.

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lobo on 02/09/2015 07:53 pm
... An interesting rumor, not from a SpaceX'er but an Air Force friend mentioned the possibility of it being reconstructed as a second SpaceX launch facility...

*if* this turns out to be true, maybe a "fast pad" for rapid turn around and "new age" type payloads that require minimal integration, and a "classic pad" for defense and other large/sensitive payloads?

I don't see it happening. One VAFB pad should be sufficient to cover all west coast launches, even if SpaceX somehow took over all DoD launches. Which won't happen.

Yea, I don't see enough West Coast launches to warrant a 2nd pad.  I don't think commercial sats launch from those trajectories very often, and in the entire EELV program, SLC-3 and SLC-6 each only launch around once a year on average handling all the US Government payloads. 

However, it's an interesting rumor Helodriver mentions.  If any truth to it, maybe the west pad handles F9, and the East pad handles FH?  As I don't know that the Titan II flame trench at the West pad could handle more than F9.  Maybe 4W takes any bread and butter commercial F9 payloads in it's usual minimal way like LC-40, and 4E gets a service tower for USAF/DoD paylaods.  But again, where are there enough West Coast payloads that one pad can't keep up? 
Maybe they can fly payloads on FH that would otherwise normally fly from the East Coast with a severe dog leg trajectory?  And use FH's capacity to compensate for the inefficient trajectory?
I could see them maybe doing that to keep a single West Coast pad more busy and not sit around idle so much like the West Coast EELV pads do and use for East Coast "overflow", but to add a whole 2nd pad for that?  That seems pretty optimistic that they'd have so many payloads all 3 East Coast pads (assuming Boca Chica is built) are maxed out and the single West coast pad is so maxed out they'd want a 2nd West Coast pad.

Maybe it's just that SpaceX is leaving the Titan II flame trench there "just in case" they even have future need for it rather than demolishing it, and that got translated to a 2nd pad in the near term?

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 02/09/2015 07:59 pm
However, it's an interesting rumor Helodriver mentions.  If any truth to it, maybe the west pad handles F9, and the East pad handles FH?  As I don't know that the Titan II flame trench at the West pad could handle more than F9.  Maybe 4W takes any bread and butter commercial F9 payloads in it's usual minimal way like LC-40, and 4E gets a service tower for USAF/DoD paylaods.  But again, where are there enough West Coast payloads that one pad can't keep up?

No, if they are making it a landing pad, then that is what they plan on using it for - for the foreseeable future. (although I doubt they will remove the flame trench)

Any increased capacity needed will simply be handled by an increasingly efficient refurbishment and launch process - That seems to be their plan. (and hope).

The big concern is of course a launch failure - but that would likely put a short-term hold on *any* F9/FH launches anyway while an investigation is happening, so 4W would not launch anything anyway during that period.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lobo on 02/09/2015 08:04 pm
Interesting - do you have the trajectory detail?  Or why they are going from Vandenberg?  I mean you can go anywhere with enough dog legging, but is it an efficient trajectory?

It's got nothing to do with dog-legging, hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

The only drawback for interplanetary trajectories is the obvious one that holds for all other launches - you lose some benefit of Earth's rotation if you're not launching due east.

Right. Slightly worse performance to LEO parking orbit and less frequent launch windows are the two drawbacks with a west coast launch. Otherwise, once you are up there the delta-V for the TMI (or TLI) burn will be virtually identical.

INteresting.  To pull on that thread a little, what would be the restrictions of a BFR at VAFB?  As far as noise, vibration, possibility of a ginormous fireball...?
I suppose they were going to launch a BFR in STS just a bit down the coast line from SLC-4 back in the 80's, so maybe those wouldn't be a problem?  And was able to accomodate recover of the SRB's as well as receiving and transporting the ET.   (Although it sounds like SpaceX would build on site so that might not be an issue in any event).

Although, if they were planning to launch a BFR from SLC-4W, could SLC-4E even still function being that close to such a large LV at lift off?  Would they need to level both pads and build one new huge pad right in the middle?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/09/2015 08:09 pm
The inclination range for Vandenberg agrees with what's required for a commsat constellation, and if I was investing in a $10B constellation, I'd want my own pad, plus the option to use another pad in case of a contingency.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 02/09/2015 08:22 pm
There is plenty of room on Vandenberg's South Base in the Sudden Ranch area for a new build BFR pad of any size or even multiple pads with zero conflict with other land use, save for environmental impact studies. Since BFR is still some years on the horizon, it would not surprise me if SpaceX is quietly keeping tabs on SLC-6, which might come available for lease in a few years if ULA discontinues the Delta IV and operates Atlas derived future vehicles out of SLC-3E.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lobo on 02/09/2015 10:29 pm
There is plenty of room on Vandenberg's South Base in the Sudden Ranch area for a new build BFR pad of any size or even multiple pads with zero conflict with other land use, save for environmental impact studies. Since BFR is still some years on the horizon, it would not surprise me if SpaceX is quietly keeping tabs on SLC-6, which might come available for lease in a few years if ULA discontinues the Delta IV and operates Atlas derived future vehicles out of SLC-3E.

Well this concept opens up a few new possibilities that at least I hadn't thought of.

I'd always assumed BFR would launch from KSC in some way as the only East Coast area that can handle a heavy lift vehicle.  Inland locations are possibilities but have over flight issues.  Never thought of VAFB due to it's West coast location.  Figured it's inclinations would result in too big of performance hits to be considered...which is why it's not usually used for that.  But maybe that's not really the case?
I suppose even if it is less efficient, when your boosters and spacecraft are reusable, all we are talking is extra fuel needed...which is mostly insignificant by itself.

So if that's not a problem, then it actually sounds like VAFB could be a very good location indeed. 
Yes, Obviously if ULA were to standardize on one NGLV, they'd not need two West Coast pads.  I keep forgetting when I think of "HLV pads" there is another besides 39A, 39B, and the old N-1/Energia pad in the world.  There's SLC-6. 
SLC-6 was built to handle the thrust of the Shuttle.  Was that flame trench tore out and replaced when they converted it to Delta 4?  BFR might need it ripped out and replaced anyway, but just curious.

Also sounds like there's other areas they could develop from scratch for BFR at VAFB south of there then?

Interesting...

Can a MCT Mars mission be staged in LEO and fueled up with several BFR launches from VAFB?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: docmordrid on 02/09/2015 11:00 pm
There is plenty of room on Vandenberg's South Base in the Sudden Ranch area for a new build BFR pad of any size or even multiple pads with zero conflict with other land use, save for environmental impact studies. Since BFR is still some years on the horizon, it would not surprise me if SpaceX is quietly keeping tabs on SLC-6, which might come available for lease in a few years if ULA discontinues the Delta IV and operates Atlas derived future vehicles out of SLC-3E.

Well this concept opens up a few new possibilities that at least I hadn't thought of.
>
Yes, Obviously if ULA were to standardize on one NGLV, they'd not need two West Coast pads.  I keep forgetting when I think of "HLV pads" there is another besides 39A, 39B, and the old N-1/Energia pad in the world.  There's SLC-6. 

SLC-6 was built to handle the thrust of the Shuttle.  Was that flame trench tore out and replaced when they converted it to Delta 4?  BFR might need it ripped out and replaced anyway, but just curious.

Also sounds like there's other areas they could develop from scratch for BFR at VAFB south of there then?

Interesting...

Can a MCT Mars mission be staged in LEO and fueled up with several BFR launches from VAFB?

Hmmmm....

SpaceFlight Insider, January 26, 2015.... (http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/organizations/ula/insider-interview-united-launch-alliances-tory-bruno-next-generation-launch-system/)

Quote
>
Bruno: “You know, the transformation of this offering is broader than just the engine or NGLS and it actually does include our launch infrastructure. So, today we have five launch sites and we intend to move toward having as few as two – one at each Coast....
>
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 02/09/2015 11:06 pm
SLC-6 has three flame ducts, two of which were built for the Shuttle SRBs and are currently used for the Delta IV exhaust. The third was built for the SSME exhaust and was filled in, not ripped out, when it was converted for Delta IV.  You can see it to the left side of this picture I recently shot. With suitable excavation and jackhammering, It could probably be restored.

Any new BFR will need a completely new launch stand as it is. Give SpaceX's track record of renovating old pads for new use, about the only thing they tend to keep is the flame ducts and plumbing, although in this case SLC-6's well maintained mobile full environmental enclosure scaled for oversize vehicles might be an asset worth saving.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: groundbound on 02/10/2015 12:54 am
There is plenty of room on Vandenberg's South Base in the Sudden Ranch area for a new build BFR pad of any size or even multiple pads with zero conflict with other land use, save for environmental impact studies. Since BFR is still some years on the horizon, it would not surprise me if SpaceX is quietly keeping tabs on SLC-6, which might come available for lease in a few years if ULA discontinues the Delta IV and operates Atlas derived future vehicles out of SLC-3E.

Well this concept opens up a few new possibilities that at least I hadn't thought of.

I'd always assumed BFR would launch from KSC in some way as the only East Coast area that can handle a heavy lift vehicle.  Inland locations are possibilities but have over flight issues.  Never thought of VAFB due to it's West coast location.  Figured it's inclinations would result in too big of performance hits to be considered...which is why it's not usually used for that.  But maybe that's not really the case?
I suppose even if it is less efficient, when your boosters and spacecraft are reusable, all we are talking is extra fuel needed...which is mostly insignificant by itself.

So if that's not a problem, then it actually sounds like VAFB could be a very good location indeed. 
Yes, Obviously if ULA were to standardize on one NGLV, they'd not need two West Coast pads.  I keep forgetting when I think of "HLV pads" there is another besides 39A, 39B, and the old N-1/Energia pad in the world.  There's SLC-6. 
SLC-6 was built to handle the thrust of the Shuttle.  Was that flame trench tore out and replaced when they converted it to Delta 4?  BFR might need it ripped out and replaced anyway, but just curious.

Also sounds like there's other areas they could develop from scratch for BFR at VAFB south of there then?

Interesting...

Can a MCT Mars mission be staged in LEO and fueled up with several BFR launches from VAFB?

This is probably obvious but doesn't it also suggest that VAFB will be not so terrible for commercial geosynchronous missions? You have a booster with relatively good ISP and lots of payload/fuel margin, sort of optimized for deep space restarts. So you launch a trajectory that crosses the equator near geosynchronous distance and then do the plane change somewhere near apogee.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AncientU on 02/10/2015 02:42 am
Even though it's great fun to get ahead of ourselves, the question of whether the Vandenburg site would be an adequate location for ConstellationX seems to be YES.  Future SpaceX launches of GPS sats for USAF seems likely.  Iridium and others are planning LEO/MEO networks, possibly launched from Vandy.  EDS launches seem doable. Hawthorne is just down the road...

The West coast could play a larger role for SpaceX future than we've been surmising.

And then there's BFR.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lobo on 02/10/2015 05:37 pm
Hmmmm....

SpaceFlight Insider, January 26, 2015.... (http://www.spaceflightinsider.com/organizations/ula/insider-interview-united-launch-alliances-tory-bruno-next-generation-launch-system/)

Quote
>
Bruno: “You know, the transformation of this offering is broader than just the engine or NGLS and it actually does include our launch infrastructure. So, today we have five launch sites and we intend to move toward having as few as two – one at each Coast....
>

The 5th site I assume is a Delta II site?

It would make sense to keep the two Atlas pads as they can do the fastest processing and are the cheapest to operate I assume?
SLC-3 should be able to easily handle the small number of West Coast launches ULA does each year by itself.  And LC-41 could easily be expanded to double it's capacity by adding a 2nd VIF.  It's set up to accomodate multiple VIF's as it is all using the single common pad with mobile launch platforms.  So if the one VIF there were to not be able to keep up they could build another right next to it, and have operations still consolidated to just one East coast launch complex rather than two.

That would leave SLC-6 and LC-37 available for other uses.  SLC-6 now seems like a possibility for a SpaceX BFR.  I wonder what could become of LC-37?  I doubt SpaceX would have need of it if they develop a pad at Boca Chica, and if they have vertical payload integration at LC-39A.  But...if OSC/ATK were looking for a pad at the cape to launch Antares from with vertical payload integration to get USAF/DoD contracts...
Seems plausible it could be modified to accomodate Antares?

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lobo on 02/10/2015 06:21 pm
SLC-6 has three flame ducts, two of which were built for the Shuttle SRBs and are currently used for the Delta IV exhaust. The third was built for the SSME exhaust and was filled in, not ripped out, when it was converted for Delta IV.  You can see it to the left side of this picture I recently shot. With suitable excavation and jackhammering, It could probably be restored.

Any new BFR will need a completely new launch stand as it is. Give SpaceX's track record of renovating old pads for new use, about the only thing they tend to keep is the flame ducts and plumbing, although in this case SLC-6's well maintained mobile full environmental enclosure scaled for oversize vehicles might be an asset worth saving.

Ahhh.  Thanks for the info Helo.

Yea, SpaceX seems to tend to level everything and start over, but as you said, those mobile enclosures would be an interesting bit to see if they'd be retained, as they've been maintained unlike the old Titan MSS's. 
But not sure -how- they would, as I can't imagine the BFR would fit in it while vertical, unless they can be added on to the top?  (looking at old Shuttle Era pictures of SLC-6, it looks like the East enclosure has been added on to and is taller for Delta than it was for STS?  so maybe they could make them even taller.)

AS for the flame trenches, I don't know if they'd be able to use that SSME exhaust trench even if it wasn't filled in, as BFR's engines will all be in one location rather than offset like the Shuttle's were.   Maybe those two ducts could handle BFR's thrust?  They were designed to handle the Shuttle SRB thrust?  Depends on what BFR's thrust ends up being and what their actual maximum rated thrust really is.  Unlike LC-39A and 39B I'm sure they weren't designed for the 12Mlbs of thrust of a Nova Class LV.  If not, they'd have to rebuild them.

Myself, looking at layout pictures of SLC-6, I'd assume a HIF to the West, the western enclosure and buildings removed to build it.  Then it rolls out over the expanded trench and goes vertical.  The Eastern enclosure could be modified to allow access to the entire stack while vertical, although not environmentally controlled and enclosed, more like the LC-37 MSS.

The BFR TEL could use the rail system there that the Western enclosure wouldn't be using if it was removed.
Actually, on 2nd thought, maybe the western enclosure could be lengthened to make it a mobile HIF enclosure so BFR could actually be stacked on a a fixed erector rather than a mobile one?  It might solve some issues with erecting such a  big heavy LV if they don't need to move it.  SLC-6 is designed for on pad stacking after all.
The building where the stages would be manufactured/reprocessed could be where those buildings are off to the West there and then rolled right over to an MHIF.  Landing pads for the cores and 2nd stages would be somwhere near by.  Looks like there's lost of room.

Intersting thought....


Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: LouScheffer on 02/10/2015 07:31 pm

[...] Hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

This is false, but in the opposite sense you might think.   For maximum efficiency, the parking orbit has to pass through the antipodal point.   If this point is not on the equator, the equatorial orbit will never cross it.  Therefore, you can't (efficiently) launch to Mars from an equatorial orbit, except twice a year.  And you can't launch out of the ecliptic by more than 23 degrees, ever.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/10/2015 07:51 pm

[...] Hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

This is false, but in the opposite sense you might think.   For maximum efficiency, the parking orbit has to pass through the antipodal point.   If this point is not on the equator, the equatorial orbit will never cross it.  Therefore, you can't (efficiently) launch to Mars from an equatorial orbit, except twice a year.  And you can't launch out of the ecliptic by more than 23 degrees, ever.

Back when we were discussing MPT refueling, the best looking approach was to have a highly elliptical parking orbit, since you can then do an Oberth burn, and get more dV for the Mars craft without having to carry larger tanks.

For such a high orbit, IIUC, the initial plane does not really matter, since you can change planes at apogee with very low penalty. FWIW, since you change the plane before the refueling, it doesn't matter at all.

Still, I think the commSat business is earlier than MCT, and given the predicted flight rate, they need more than one pad. It's not like you can go to the customer and say "sorry, the pad is unavailable".  The customers are the ones that put in $10B, and they want to ABCD.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: ugordan on 02/10/2015 08:11 pm

[...] Hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

This is false, but in the opposite sense you might think.   For maximum efficiency, the parking orbit has to pass through the antipodal point.   If this point is not on the equator, the equatorial orbit will never cross it.  Therefore, you can't (efficiently) launch to Mars from an equatorial orbit, except twice a year.  And you can't launch out of the ecliptic by more than 23 degrees, ever.

I was making an oversimplification to make the point that planetary injection orbits don't have strong constraints on launch site. By injection point I meant what you probably mean by antipodal point, it obviously *has* to be reachable by the initial parking orbit.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/10/2015 08:55 pm

[...] Hyperbolic Earth escape trajectories don't care about parking orbit inclination. You can launch to Mars from a sun-synchronous orbit just as well as from an equatorial orbit. It's just a matter of setting up the parking orbit to intersect the injection point at the right time.

This is false, but in the opposite sense you might think.   For maximum efficiency, the parking orbit has to pass through the antipodal point.   If this point is not on the equator, the equatorial orbit will never cross it.  Therefore, you can't (efficiently) launch to Mars from an equatorial orbit, except twice a year.  And you can't launch out of the ecliptic by more than 23 degrees, ever.

I was making an oversimplification to make the point that planetary injection orbits don't have strong constraints on launch site. By injection point I meant what you probably mean by antipodal point, it obviously *has* to be reachable by the initial parking orbit.

Yes, I wasn't responding directly to your point.  Just from a lay person's point of view, if you're aiming for a high elliptical orbit, clearly you can take care of the inclination later, and so can launch from anywhere.

Especially if you're going to have all of MCT, the refueling fleet, and the manned craft fleet meet at this parking orbit, it should be accessible from as many launch pads as possible - this is another reason to have a high elliptical parking orbit.  Which craft will launch from which pads - I can't tell.  At first guess?  MCT from 39x, fuel fleet from Texas, people from Vandenberg (Because the empty dragons have to come back there)

But we're not getting into MCT speculation area...
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 02/11/2015 06:26 am
A highly elliptical parking orbit will pass through the Van Allen Belt many times. Not possible for crew and not advisable for sensitive cargo including avionics.

I assume you mean highly elliptical, not high elliptical here. A high elliptical orbit will lose the advantage of the Oberth effect for TMI.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/11/2015 06:38 am
A highly elliptical parking orbit will pass through the Van Allen Belt many times. Not possible for crew and not advisable for sensitive cargo including avionics.

I assume you mean highly elliptical, not high elliptical here. A high elliptical orbit will lose the advantage of the Oberth effect for TMI.

People will load last, and since the period of such an orbit can be pretty long, it will end up being just a few exposures - and these people are going to Mars don't forget.

The other option we discussed wrt MCT was an L2 parking orbit (for the same benefit), and the same inclination argument applies to that as well.

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 02/11/2015 06:50 am
People will load last, and since the period of such an orbit can be pretty long, it will end up being just a few exposures - and these people are going to Mars don't forget.

People loading last is a logistical nightmare. The targeted cost requires they go up with the MCT. Early flights with few crew may be different.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 02/11/2015 06:51 am
People will load last, and since the period of such an orbit can be pretty long, it will end up being just a few exposures - and these people are going to Mars don't forget.

People loading last is a logistical nightmare. The targeted cost requires they go up with the MCT. Early flights with few crew may be different.

NP.  This is the Vandenberg thread though.  I said you can reach high parking orbits from Vandenberg.
Whether these are good or not, that's in the MCT thread.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 02/11/2015 06:55 am
NP.  This is the Vandenberg thread though.  I said you can reach high parking orbits from Vandenberg.
Whether these are good or not, that's in the MCT thread.

Sorry, didn't look at the thread title.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 02/11/2015 07:35 am


A highly elliptical parking orbit will pass through the Van Allen Belt many times. Not possible for crew and not advisable for sensitive cargo including avionics.

I assume you mean highly elliptical, not high elliptical here. A high elliptical orbit will lose the advantage of the Oberth effect for TMI.

Context was a high apogee having low penalty for a plane change, so I think either high or highly would get the same point across.

As long as perigee is near LEO, you do not lose Oberth benefits to TMI with an elliptical parking orbit (nor L2).

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lobo on 02/12/2015 05:41 pm
So...seems like there could be a lot of positives with expanded launches from VAFB in general, and not just for use with the occasional polar orbit payload.  Perhaps even a good location for a BFR.

What would be the drawbacks for using it vs. CCAFS?  Could they build a whole new pad and HIF at SLC-4W for double operates (and put booster and DRagon landing pads off to the side) and launch paylaods that'd usually be launched from the East coast?
I don't know a lot about trajectories and orbital mechanics, so just curious about this.  VAFB hasn't been used much by ULA over the year so I was thinking SpaceX would only have occasional launches from there too.  But perhaps not?

It was used a fair amount during the old Titan and Thor/Delta days though, I believe?  What types of paylaods were being launhed back then? (outside of all of the Minuteman ICBM test)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: baldusi on 02/12/2015 06:44 pm
Vandenberg can't launch lower than 70deg orbits without some doglegging. And the oil rigs there make throw quite a tantrum when they are ordered to stand down for the launch. So I don't think you would see much launches save for SSO and polar orbits.
Now, if you chose to send a fleet of LEO comm sats, I believe you would still want to launch from CCAF since 56deg is quite doable and covers a lot of the world population. You'd need to add some more inclined satellites, and those would fly from VAFB. And everything that's observation or Molyinia/Tundra. So it's a matter more of lack of actual payloads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: abaddon on 02/12/2015 06:50 pm
Now, if you chose to send a fleet of LEO comm sats, I believe you would still want to launch from CCAF since 56deg is quite doable and covers a lot of the world population.

Iridium Next will be launched solely from VAFB (well, aside from the first two that are going up on Dnepr): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_satellite_constellation#Next-generation_constellation
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: baldusi on 02/12/2015 08:09 pm
Now, if you chose to send a fleet of LEO comm sats, I believe you would still want to launch from CCAF since 56deg is quite doable and covers a lot of the world population.

Iridium Next will be launched solely from VAFB (well, aside from the first two that are going up on Dnepr): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_satellite_constellation#Next-generation_constellation
Well, I was thinking of SpaceX's 4000 satellite configuraiton. The business of Iridium is global coverage. So they are close to polar. But look at recent launches, like O3b, Orbcomm, etc., and they are rather launched on less inclined orbits. If you're going to put hundreds of satellites, you're not going to put them on the same inclination.  Else, you'd have an overpopulation of satellites closer to the poles, exactly where you have lower population density. Nothing precludes from having a few near polar planes, but those would be the exception rather than the rule. CCAF 56deg can get you a lot of coverage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: abaddon on 02/12/2015 09:15 pm
Iridium is (I believe) the biggest LEO constellation and SpaceX will want global coverage for their constellation.  So I'm not seeing why it isn't a possibly good model in this regard?

Since the SpaceX constellation is aiming to be backbone-centric it wouldn't hurt that those polar satellites would be more used for relaying traffic than servicing customers directly.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 02/14/2015 02:59 pm
the latter are likely N2O4 scrubbers

As far as I'm aware the only use SpaceX has for nitrogen tetroxide is the Dragon capsule, and the only planned flight of Dragon at Vandenberg is the inflight abort test. For only one flight involving not a lot of N2O4, compared say the Titans that used to inhabit this pad, its interesting that SpaceX would install so much vapor scrubbing capacity.

Quite a few satellites use some form of hypers. I don't know of any of them that don't use N2O4 if it's a bi-prop system. There is some variability on the fuel.

If SpaceX starts payload processing at their facility in Vandy, they would need a scrubber.

But would they need three, maybe four, of them?  Seems like overkill to me, but I don't have the faintest clue what the capacity of one of those trailer units would be.

3 or 4 maybe for the FH; what if they just want to increase fuel load for a standard F9R?



Assuming they ARE scrubbers, whether the payload is launched on a regular F9 or FH shouldn't matter all that much, unless the payloads they are planning for include long-life, maneuvering payloads such as something from certain TLA (Three-Letter Agencies) and such. They might just be planning ahead.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Herb Schaltegger on 02/14/2015 03:42 pm

I'm looking at this from a different angle; the "R" is taking away performance.   SX could be looking for a low cost way to get some performance back.


Okay, sure. That's what the whole "F9 1.1" and "FH" business is all about in the first place, the upgraded thrust of the Merlin 1D, and possible propellant densification is all about.

What has that got to do with hypergolic fume scrubbers?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 02/14/2015 06:45 pm


I'm looking at this from a different angle; the "R" is taking away performance.   SX could be looking for a low cost way to get some performance back.


Wrong angle.  That would not be low cost.  There are cheaper and simpler ways.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 03/21/2015 04:27 am
After a period of slow visible progress at SLC-4. Activity has once again picked up pace. Warm conditions prevailed, causing a fair amount of heat shimmer in the pics.

The first definitive earth moving in construction for the landing pad at SLC-4W has commenced with all old Titan era concrete removed in the former MST park site and grading, filling, and leveling earthworks taking place. The old Titan flame trench, exhaust duct, and low relief structures do not appear to be involved (as of yet) in the conversion to a landing facility, leaving open the (rumored) possibility of future launches from this site.

The Launch table has been connected to the transporter erector and the launch mount structure rotated from horizontal for the first time in over a year. This afforded a unique view of the bottom of the launch table. The top was also visible, from a significant distance from the north, showing the modular nature of the launch mount plugs installed for single stick Falcons, which will be removed for Heavy operations, leaving a larger opening for the three core exhaust stream.

With the launch table removed, an oblique view of updated pad plumbing is visible, showing a few changes over the last 6 weeks. The left most of the newly installed white tanks had been labelled as liquid nitrogen, and the other new tanks have been given identification letters in series from right to left.

The concrete work to the right of the flame duct is complete forming a smooth level concrete surface in this formerly sloping sunken space.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cuddihy on 03/24/2015 12:55 am
Great pics Helodriver!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 03/28/2015 06:00 pm
Some unusual multiple crane lifting activity going on with the launch table and T/E recently at SLC-4E. Not entirely sure what the purpose was, but it gives a good idea of how large and heavy the strongback and launcher structure is.

Meanwhile the excavation and leveling process at SLC-4W for the landing pad is proceeding visibly.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: russianhalo117 on 03/28/2015 06:20 pm
Some unusual multiple crane lifting activity going on with the launch table and T/E recently at SLC-4E. Not entirely sure what the purpose was, but it gives a good idea of how large and heavy the strongback and launcher structure is.

Meanwhile the excavation and leveling process at SLC-4W for the landing pad is proceeding visibly.
My father who is currently at VAFB says that they are to rotate the launch mount 90 degrees onto construction supports so that maintenance work for the next launch and final outfitting of piping, electronics/data cabling installation for FH can be conducted. In order for the FH work to be completed it had to be disconnected and removed from the pad to an area further up the ramp. A TEL parking/maintenance area will be will be built later at all of the FH pads.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 03/29/2015 04:34 am
Great pics as always Helodriver!  Can anyone give a reasonable estimation for the dimensions of the graded area at SLC-4W?  How closely does it correspond to the layout listed in the EA for the planned landing pad(s) at LC-13?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: WmThomas on 03/29/2015 06:47 pm
Thanks for all pics Helodriver!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AncientU on 03/29/2015 08:55 pm
Now, if you chose to send a fleet of LEO comm sats, I believe you would still want to launch from CCAF since 56deg is quite doable and covers a lot of the world population.

Iridium Next will be launched solely from VAFB (well, aside from the first two that are going up on Dnepr): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_satellite_constellation#Next-generation_constellation
Well, I was thinking of SpaceX's 4000 satellite configuraiton. The business of Iridium is global coverage. So they are close to polar. But look at recent launches, like O3b, Orbcomm, etc., and they are rather launched on less inclined orbits. If you're going to put hundreds of satellites, you're not going to put them on the same inclination.  Else, you'd have an overpopulation of satellites closer to the poles, exactly where you have lower population density. Nothing precludes from having a few near polar planes, but those would be the exception rather than the rule. CCAF 56deg can get you a lot of coverage.

I believe that Vandy is the planned launch site for the 4,000 sat constellation.  Plans for 30 launches from there could only be for such constellations...

Here's a string and lead-in article (near the end) talking about lots, including plans for Vandy.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35292.msg1235412#msg1235412
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: russianhalo117 on 03/30/2015 01:51 am
Now, if you chose to send a fleet of LEO comm sats, I believe you would still want to launch from CCAF since 56deg is quite doable and covers a lot of the world population.

Iridium Next will be launched solely from VAFB (well, aside from the first two that are going up on Dnepr): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iridium_satellite_constellation#Next-generation_constellation
Well, I was thinking of SpaceX's 4000 satellite configuraiton. The business of Iridium is global coverage. So they are close to polar. But look at recent launches, like O3b, Orbcomm, etc., and they are rather launched on less inclined orbits. If you're going to put hundreds of satellites, you're not going to put them on the same inclination.  Else, you'd have an overpopulation of satellites closer to the poles, exactly where you have lower population density. Nothing precludes from having a few near polar planes, but those would be the exception rather than the rule. CCAF 56deg can get you a lot of coverage.

I believe that Vandy is the planned launch site for the 4,000 sat constellation.  Plans for 30 launches from there could only be for such constellations...

Here's a string and lead-in article (near the end) talking about lots, including plans for Vandy.

http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35292.msg1235412#msg1235412
30 near back to back launches will make the 30th SW and VAFB units very happy if it happens. It will also test longevity and stress of that many launches.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Baranquilla on 03/30/2015 03:29 pm

30 near back to back launches will make the 30th SW and VAFB units very happy if it happens. It will also test longevity and stress of that many launches.
I just wrote in my thesis that both Landsat 7, Terra (aster, modis) and Ikonos were launched in 1999 from VAFB. I hope spacex will entertain us with an equally active VAFB  for years to come! 

PS: I'm sorry this is not an update.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 04/01/2015 06:59 am
A quick visit to SLC-4 to check progress on a nearly 90 degree day in the California Central Coast, that's really hot for the beginning of April here, or really anytime out on Vandenberg. As such strong heat shimmer made most pictures unusable, despite the visible breeze. I was able to get one semi clear close up shot of the plumbing around the new liquid nitrogen and LOX tanks that could be used for possible LOX densification.

Not much other visible changes since a few days ago. Landing pad excavation is still ongoing and the T/E and launch mount are still pulled away from the launch stand. The lifting cranes from last week have been removed.

Accurate measurement of the size of the landing pad and its configuration is still difficult to determine with the earthworks still ongoing.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 04/01/2015 07:25 am
Accurate measurement of the size of the landing pad and its configuration is still difficult to determine with the earthworks still ongoing.

Thanks.  I know we're not necessarily seeing the final footprint yet.  I was just trying to get a ballpark on what's there so far.  Based on my prior attempts (failures) to do so, I'm terrible at trying to estimate distances from pictures.  I was hoping someone on the site might give it a go.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: CJ on 04/02/2015 01:20 am
A quick visit to SLC-4 to check progress on a nearly 90 degree day in the California Central Coast, that's really hot for the beginning of April here, or really anytime out on Vandenberg. As such strong heat shimmer made most pictures unusable, despite the visible breeze. I was able to get one semi clear close up shot of the plumbing around the new liquid nitrogen and LOX tanks that could be used for possible LOX densification.

Not much other visible changes since a few days ago. Landing pad excavation is still ongoing and the T/E and launch mount are still pulled away from the launch stand. The lifting cranes from last week have been removed.

Accurate measurement of the size of the landing pad and its configuration is still difficult to determine with the earthworks still ongoing.

Thank you for braving the fierce heat of Vandenberg. Sorry to hear that the temps wrecked the other pics via heat shimmer. I can see the effects of it even in this pic, especially around the flag.

Would you happen to know offhand if Ocean Beach will be open to the public for the Jason-3 launch? It's been open for others, but I can't find any indication that it's open for all. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 04/10/2015 02:39 pm
New article with photos from Chris re tanking test of the in-flight abort stage at VAFB:

http://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2015/04/spacex-tanking-tests-in-flight-abort-falcon-9/
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: spacenut on 04/10/2015 03:40 pm
Is Vandenberg for polar orbits only, or can they launch east also?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Newton_V on 04/10/2015 03:48 pm
Is Vandenberg for polar orbits only, or can they launch east also?

SSE only.  ~150 deg flight azimuth

Can go retrograde though.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 04/10/2015 04:11 pm
Based on the uptick in activity at SLC-4 lately I figured something interesting was about to happen out there sooner than later. Coming over the ridge from a few miles away it was immediately obvious that yesterday was the day, the TEL was vertical for the first time I'd seen in over a year. Even better, the TEL was carrying something!

Chris has used some of the pics for the great article, but many higher resolution closer view ones are available in L2.

Attached here are a few images showing the newly revealed In Flight Abort Vehicle from different angles.

Additionally yesterday's Amtrak passengers got an excellent view of the vehicle and the landing area as well.

The landing pad has a new berm built along its square perimeter. No paving has taken place, I'm not yet convinced the berm is a permanent feature.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jdeshetler on 04/10/2015 04:58 pm
The landing pad has a new berm built along its square perimeter. No paving has taken place, I'm not yet convinced the berm is a permanent feature.

Interesting, here is an 1960 drawing of blast protection berm.  This "landing pad" might be prepped temporary for in-flight abort landing mission?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: freds on 04/10/2015 10:45 pm
That's very interesting, does the stage have the hardware where legs could be attached?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: BuzzumFrog on 04/10/2015 11:11 pm
Can you see the launchpad if you take the Surfliner train?

I'm looking at your 2nd to last photo, ending in "040".
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: catdlr on 04/10/2015 11:40 pm
Can you see the launchpad if you take the Surfliner train?

I'm looking at your 2nd to last photo, ending in "040".

here is a video (very bumpy) taken from the southbound Amtrak through South Vandy (start from 5:00 into the video) of the are your interested in.

Amtrak #11 coast starlight going by Vandenberg AFB, CA part 2
https://youtu.be/tFtLxwfRqhc
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 04/11/2015 02:01 am
Excellent.  I was wondering when we'd see SpaceX testing out the added/repaired GSE.  With the July 22nd launch of Jason-3 fast approaching, I was starting to get a bit anxious because we hadn't seen anything yet.

As always, thanks for the great pics Helodriver!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: russianhalo117 on 04/11/2015 03:15 am
A note: The launcher stabilization arms for the srongback were lowered from top of TEL down a 3rd to top of first stage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 04/11/2015 08:07 pm
Yeah, not a lot of humans going to polar orbits.  And the humans interested in doing so typically belong to a military service.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Mindbuilder on 04/11/2015 08:17 pm
With Vandenberg being an Air Force base, lots of good recent pictures aren't all that easy to come by. But here are some rare pictures of the coastline from a couple decades ago, if you want to get a better feel for the area around the launch pad.
http://www.californiacoastline.org/cgi-bin/image.cgi?image=8904050&mode=sequential&flags=1&year=current
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: mtakala24 on 04/11/2015 10:38 pm
I never knew that a passenger line passes as close as that. Cancelled services on launch days?

Also, this thread is supposed to be for updates. Without the previous posts, I still wouldn't know this. Makes me think about the nature of this thread....
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 04/12/2015 01:12 am
I never knew that a passenger line passes as close as that. Cancelled services on launch days?

Also, this thread is supposed to be for updates. Without the previous posts, I still wouldn't know this. Makes me think about the nature of this thread....

Seems like there may not be a full consensus on what happens or rules have changed at some point.  Helodriver and Jim discussed it earlier in the thread.  Helo saying that on launches he worked the trains were held and Jim that previously the launches were held to let the trains through.

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35480.msg1293611#msg1293611
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Damon Hill on 04/12/2015 01:38 am
That railroad line (former Southern Pacific?) was built many decades, perhaps almost a century, before that location was selected for rocket launches.  Given the mountains in the region, there's hardly anyplace else that the railroad line could have been relocated to.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 04/12/2015 01:59 am
Also, this thread is supposed to be for updates. Without the previous posts, I still wouldn't know this. Makes me think about the nature of this thread....

Add "and Discussion" to the title.  fixed.

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: russianhalo117 on 04/12/2015 02:09 am
SpaceX Vandenberg Updates Thread: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=35480.0

Per the request of several posters in the SpaceX Vandenberg Updates thread, I have created this thread so that future discussions do not interfere with the update thread's purpose, updates.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 04/12/2015 03:55 am
(Relocated from updates thread and prior post deleted - thank you (spaseba) russianhalo117)

So, with the exceptions of "data/film" RV capsules (and warheads), this will be the first human (rated?) capsule launched from Vandenberg? We didn't end up ever launching a Shuttle there, even though giving it a good college try for a few billion dollars ...

Any bets on when the first humans in any capsule fly from there?

A note: The launcher stabilization arms for the strongback were lowered from top of TEL down a 3rd to top of first stage.

Looks like a few other mods there on in preparation for clearing/support umbilicals/etc.

Note they can launch a "short" 3-engine vehicle if ever needed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: GClark on 04/12/2015 06:19 am

So, with the exceptions of "data/film" RV capsules (and warheads), this will be the first human (rated?) capsule launched from Vandenberg?


I suppose that depends on how one classifies the SAMOS E-5s.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 04/15/2015 06:28 pm
Now that CRS-6 has launched, SpaceX is down to only one rocket currently on a pad. ;)

Last evening's visit to SLC-4 showed some changes to the infrastructure since last week, with new cooling units being added (B3); High pressure gas tanks being relocated as expected to the new concrete area near the flame duct (B1); and the two trailer mounted white tank assemblages being removed (B2).

Other than that, the setting sun provided some great color and light to the three engine abort test Falcon still being put through its paces on the pad. More new extremely high resolution images of the vehicle are now available on L2.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 04/23/2015 02:21 am
Repeated tanking tests today on the Inflight Abort Test booster, with roadblocks extended out to 1.5 miles in all directions from SLC-4 well into the afternoon hours. The first picture, shot from outside this perimeter, shows the sides of the vehicle fully frosted up. Thirty minutes later the roadblocks were dropped as propellant offloading was complete and the boosters ice covering quickly dissipated.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 04/23/2015 03:58 am
Sorry, a bit hard to tell from your prose, but are you saying that there were more than 1 tanking tests run today?  Or, that a single tanking test, which was a repeat of the earlier test, was run?

Thanks for the pictures!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 04/23/2015 04:00 am
Interesting... Doesn't the outside of the RP-1 tank (with the 'SpaceX' letters) usually stay ice free? Could this be additional ice from sub-cooled LOX or RP-1 tests?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: aep on 04/23/2015 05:16 am
Interesting... Doesn't the outside of the RP-1 tank (with the 'SpaceX' letters) usually stay ice free? Could this be additional ice from sub-cooled LOX or RP-1 tests?
The freezing point of RP-1 is around -60°C so it's a good chance it will end up below freezing. Perhaps they don't have any chilling equipment setup at McGregor so they are testing at Vandenberg.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: sdsds on 04/23/2015 07:35 am
Is Vandenberg for polar orbits only, or can they launch east also?

Or for interplanetary launches (see Insight). Or even lunar launches (see Clementine), although that's presumably less relevant for SpaceX.

For a good primer on escape trajectory design and constraints, I suggest taking a look at this thread: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=1337.msg84606#msg84606
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: dror on 04/23/2015 09:08 am
I don't understand why there won't be a landing attempt in the flight abort test.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jarnis on 04/23/2015 11:03 am
I don't understand why there won't be a landing attempt in the flight abort test.

I think they are fairly certain that aerodynamics say "no" to that idea.

Blunt top of the core up, at max drag, with Dragon 2 leaving the scene (plumes from superdracos) plus, I assume engines of the first stage shutting down at that point (or soon after) -> expected result is loss of control followed by rapid disintegration.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: abaddon on 04/23/2015 01:59 pm
I don't understand why there won't be a landing attempt in the flight abort test.

Source?  Last I heard SpaceX was planning on trying it, although there are persistent questions on the forum about how likely a successful recovery will be.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 04/23/2015 02:48 pm
Interesting... Doesn't the outside of the RP-1 tank (with the 'SpaceX' letters) usually stay ice free? Could this be additional ice from sub-cooled LOX or RP-1 tests?
The freezing point of RP-1 is around -60°C so it's a good chance it will end up below freezing. Perhaps they don't have any chilling equipment setup at McGregor so they are testing at Vandenberg.

Is it possible this will be their first (test) flight of subcooled LOX/RP-1?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Baranquilla on 04/23/2015 02:56 pm
Interesting... Doesn't the outside of the RP-1 tank (with the 'SpaceX' letters) usually stay ice free? Could this be additional ice from sub-cooled LOX or RP-1 tests?
The freezing point of RP-1 is around -60°C so it's a good chance it will end up below freezing. Perhaps they don't have any chilling equipment setup at McGregor so they are testing at Vandenberg.

Is it possible this will be their first (test) flight of subcooled LOX/RP-1?

Seems to me like it would be a bad idea to combine those tests. The subcooled performance boost is of no interest to NASA. They would be adding dozens of things that could go wrong to a test they really really want to and have to ace.

EDIT: Spelling :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: ugordan on 04/23/2015 03:35 pm
They would be adding dozens of things that could go wrong to a test they really really want to and have to ace.

As opposed to testing it on an actual operational flight for a customer...
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 04/23/2015 03:59 pm
Interesting... Doesn't the outside of the RP-1 tank (with the 'SpaceX' letters) usually stay ice free? Could this be additional ice from sub-cooled LOX or RP-1 tests?
The freezing point of RP-1 is around -60°C so it's a good chance it will end up below freezing. Perhaps they don't have any chilling equipment setup at McGregor so they are testing at Vandenberg.


Freezing point is closer to -38oC.  Here's NASA's spec sheet (.pdf) (http://propellants.ksc.nasa.gov/commodities/RP1.pdf) on RP-1 which lists freezing temp of -36 oF.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Baranquilla on 04/23/2015 04:00 pm
They would be adding dozens of things that could go wrong to a test they really really want to and have to ace.

As opposed to testing it on an actual operational flight for a customer...
I just got Lawyered..
PS: This should all be deleted or moved to discussions now we have a thread for that.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Okie_Steve on 04/23/2015 04:17 pm
In the unlikely event that the stage does not disintegrate perhaps they intend to attempt "landing" on the water in a controlled vertical fashion as was done when weather prevented an ADSD attempt. That would allow collection of telemetry on engine restart and vehicle performance under another set of circumstances without add much of anything to complicate an important test and could given the ambiguous definition of "landing" could make both versions true  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: dror on 04/23/2015 06:12 pm
I don't understand why there won't be a landing attempt in the flight abort test.

Source? 

No legs.
I assumed that means no landing. I could be wrong.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: JasonAW3 on 04/23/2015 07:21 pm
I don't understand why there won't be a landing attempt in the flight abort test.

At maximum drag, there is going to be a LOT of drag that is suddebly going to impact the top of a fairly unstreamlined stage, which likely will put the stage in a tumble at best or bend it double like what had happened to the Aries X-1 boiler plate solid fuel booster when they did an in flight abort test.

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: woods170 on 04/23/2015 07:24 pm
I don't understand why there won't be a landing attempt in the flight abort test.

Flight dynamics. This thing will go through a separation event right around maximum dynamic pressure. Without it's pointy end the booster will go into a violent tumble very quickly, while still travelling thru a rather dense atmosphere at high velocity.
Like with the Little Joe vehicles it is likely that the booster will disintegrate rather quickly.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lars-J on 04/23/2015 08:30 pm
I don't understand why there won't be a landing attempt in the flight abort test.

Flight dynamics. This thing will go through a separation event right around maximum dynamic pressure. Without it's pointy end the booster will go into a violent tumble very quickly, while still travelling thru a rather dense atmosphere at high velocity.
Like with the Little Joe vehicles it is likely that the booster will disintegrate rather quickly.

It would seem so, yes. BUT since there will be no upper stage (if accurate), they could actually put some sort of aerodynamic fairing inside the trunk, which makes it possible.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Lar on 04/23/2015 10:42 pm
discussion moved to discussion thread. Advise of any errors, thanks. And thanks for helping keep things sorted in future by posting in the right place (or PMing mods when it seems like thread titles are off)

Edit: And... We mods changed our minds again, volume is light enough (and Helodriver said his posts were lonely :) ) to go with a merged thread.. updates AND discussion. Thread title changed...
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: kch on 04/23/2015 11:00 pm
Interesting... Doesn't the outside of the RP-1 tank (with the 'SpaceX' letters) usually stay ice free? Could this be additional ice from sub-cooled LOX or RP-1 tests?

The freezing point of RP-1 is around -60°C so it's a good chance it will end up below freezing. Perhaps they don't have any chilling equipment setup at McGregor so they are testing at Vandenberg.

Freezing point is closer to -38oC.  Here's NASA's spec sheet (.pdf) (http://propellants.ksc.nasa.gov/commodities/RP1.pdf) on RP-1 which lists freezing temp of -36 oF.

Whatever the exact number might be, the freezing point of RP-1 is lower than the freezing point of water, so sub-cooled RP-1 could indeed be cold enough to cause ice formation on the outside of the tank while remaining liquid.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 04/24/2015 05:12 pm
Interesting... Doesn't the outside of the RP-1 tank (with the 'SpaceX' letters) usually stay ice free? Could this be additional ice from sub-cooled LOX or RP-1 tests?

The freezing point of RP-1 is around -60°C so it's a good chance it will end up below freezing. Perhaps they don't have any chilling equipment setup at McGregor so they are testing at Vandenberg.

Freezing point is closer to -38oC.  Here's NASA's spec sheet (.pdf) (http://propellants.ksc.nasa.gov/commodities/RP1.pdf) on RP-1 which lists freezing temp of -36 oF.

Whatever the exact number might be, the freezing point of RP-1 is lower than the freezing point of water, so sub-cooled RP-1 could indeed be cold enough to cause ice formation on the outside of the tank while remaining liquid.

When commercial and military jets spend hours up in the stratosphere the fuel becomes cold soaked, its temperature coming down quite close to the ambient -50 decrees C. Frost forming on the outside of wing tanks containing this liquid kerosene fuel (Jet-A) is very common once the plane descends back into more humid air at sea level. The frost coating is relatively thin and dissipates quickly as the fuel inside the wing is not cryogenic, merely just very cold. The picture of the A-380 wing below shows the effect, which looks quite similar to what I photographed on the RP-1 tank of the IAT booster.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 04/24/2015 11:34 pm
Interesting... Doesn't the outside of the RP-1 tank (with the 'SpaceX' letters) usually stay ice free? Could this be additional ice from sub-cooled LOX or RP-1 tests?

The freezing point of RP-1 is around -60°C so it's a good chance it will end up below freezing. Perhaps they don't have any chilling equipment setup at McGregor so they are testing at Vandenberg.

Freezing point is closer to -38oC.  Here's NASA's spec sheet (.pdf) (http://propellants.ksc.nasa.gov/commodities/RP1.pdf) on RP-1 which lists freezing temp of -36 oF.

Whatever the exact number might be, the freezing point of RP-1 is lower than the freezing point of water, so sub-cooled RP-1 could indeed be cold enough to cause ice formation on the outside of the tank while remaining liquid.
Oh, yes.  Of course.  I was just correcting the bad datum, not trying to say that it wouldn't still cause the observed effect.

But, as a note, Ms. Shotwell has stated that they only plan to "slightly chill" the RP-1.  Meaning that it may not actually be cooled below the freezing point of water.  At this point, I know of no public information to give us a definite target temp. for the RP-1.
Source: https://twitter.com/AvWeekParis/status/577534249420468224
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: oldAtlas_Eguy on 04/25/2015 03:57 pm
I looking at the density functions for RP-1 and lox and the following conclusions showed up.

To balance the increase in density of RP-1 with the increase in density of LOX a 10 degree K chill give an increase of ~4%.

To obtain a similar density increase in RP-1 would be a chill from ambient design temperature 25 degree C to a -20 degree C or ~4%.

It all depends of how much colder they can chill the LOX. A 5 degree LOX chill is only a 2% prop gain. The RP-1 temp for a 2% gain is 0 degree C.

For ice to form the RP-1 temp is less than 0 degree C. This suggests  somewhere around -10 degree C from Shotwell's statement giving a design density improvement for the prop in the vehicle of ~3%.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Space Ghost 1962 on 04/27/2015 08:05 pm
Makes sense to test subcooling on a vehicle almost certain to be destroyed in flight.

You can risk microfractures/fatigue caused by extreme thermal cycling of multiple launch attempts. Likely chilling will also only occur on expendable ("legless") launches.

Also, by analyzing the stress pattern of the likely structural failure post capsule escape, one might determine through this destructive test what the upper bounds are on bending/compression loads as well as where to add/remove material to optimize safety/performance of first stage.

If it were me, I'd  be tempted to top the first stage with a shallow rigid cone transferring load to the sidewalls, hiding under the Dragon test article, with additional strain gauges to measure the dynamics of separation and flight control in an extreme transient case ... like to know how much more it would take to have a recoverable, controllable vehicle.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 04/27/2015 08:32 pm
Liquid nitrogen has a boiling temperature of 77k. It is used for cooling LOX. So would it be reasonable to assume they cool LOX by 13K to 77k?

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Mader Levap on 04/27/2015 11:41 pm
You can risk microfractures/fatigue caused by extreme thermal cycling of multiple launch attempts. Likely chilling will also only occur on expendable ("legless") launches.
Um, no. Chilling, among other things, is done to allow more launches to be recoverable (https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/572257004938403840).
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Robotbeat on 04/28/2015 01:44 am
Liquid nitrogen has a boiling temperature of 77k. It is used for cooling LOX. So would it be reasonable to assume they cool LOX by 13K to 77k?
Depends. If you pull a vacuum on the nitrogen, you can get down to (at best) 63K. So they can actually go about 14 degrees colder still. But that might be a lot to ask from a full tank of propellant.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AncientU on 04/28/2015 04:44 pm
Liquid nitrogen has a boiling temperature of 77k. It is used for cooling LOX. So would it be reasonable to assume they cool LOX by 13K to 77k?
Depends. If you pull a vacuum on the nitrogen, you can get down to (at best) 63K. So they can actually go about 14 degrees colder still. But that might be a lot to ask from a full tank of propellant.

Decreasing the saturation pressure/temperature on LN2 really only works for low boil-off conditions.  Extreme energy input as would be expected in a counter-flow heat exchanger (Lox or Kero on one side, LN2 on other)  or even a cooling bath would probably operate at or near atmospheric pressure -- or even slightly elevated pressure depending on the back-pressure created by the GN2 exhaust flow rate.  A HUGE vacuum pump might be able to out-pump the gas generation rate, but the extra few degrees are probably not worth it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 05/04/2015 07:14 pm
Current images from Vandenberg's SLC-4 show that the Inflight Abort Test Booster has been removed from the pad and work is underway for the Jason 3 launch campaign following a couple weeks of tanking tests.

The gripper arms have been relocated back to the top of the T/E strongback.

New large vertically oriented tanks of unknown purpose have been installed south and west of the launch table mount. I suspect these might be temporary.

A crane is being used to construct additional structure around and over the RP-1 tanks.

No new progress has been made for some weeks on the construction of the landing pad. This corresponds with information that RTLS of the Jason 3 booster, while desired, has not been approved.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 05/04/2015 08:25 pm
No new progress has been made for some weeks on the construction of the landing pad. This corresponds with information that RTLS of the Jason 3 booster, while desired, has not been approved.

Thanks, Helodriver. Not surprising that RTLS has not yet been approved for Jason 3.

I know opinions here differ as to what preconditions the VAFB range will set for RTLS, but at the very least they'd surely want to see a successful barge landing off the Cape first. If SpaceX can do it on CRS-7, that would certainly improve their case for Jason 3.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 05/05/2015 12:24 am
When I was there last week I should have asked if they are going to remove the antenna next to the landing area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 05/05/2015 12:36 am
When I was there last week I should have asked if they are going to remove the antenna next to the landing area.

That's a darn good question. About how far from the landing pad is the antenna do you think... or know ;-)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 05/05/2015 04:54 am
When I was there last week I should have asked if they are going to remove the antenna next to the landing area.

That's a darn good question. About how far from the landing pad is the antenna do you think... or know ;-)

The "antenna" is a weather mast, rigged with anemometers along its length it measures winds at multiple levels to determine which way and how much the vehicle will drift in its first seconds after release. Being an AF asset and low level winds being a key parameter in meeting launch weather criteria, I suspect the tower is going to stay in place. It is 450 feet from the center of the cleared area where the landing pad is being built. Only if a multi pad arrangement like at the Cape's LC-13 is in the offing would I expect that it might be relocated, as flat land inside the SpaceX controlled area is limited.

The engineer contact I spoke to last month said the pad design is not final but they are leaning toward either a single square or circle, paved 18 to 24 inches thick with concrete and about 300 feet across.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 05/05/2015 02:32 pm
No new progress has been made for some weeks on the construction of the landing pad. This corresponds with information that RTLS of the Jason 3 booster, while desired, has not been approved.

Thanks, Helodriver. Not surprising that RTLS has not yet been approved for Jason 3.

I know opinions here differ as to what preconditions the VAFB range will set for RTLS, but at the very least they'd surely want to see a successful barge landing off the Cape first. If SpaceX can do it on CRS-7, that would certainly improve their case for Jason 3.

I have to wonder if the last barge landing attempt may actually cause a few more conditions to be placed on the RTLS.  When the Falcon tipped over there was some high flying debris.  Has anyone tried to calculate the travel distance based on the video and overlay that on the Vandenberg landing pad location?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 05/05/2015 03:57 pm
No new progress has been made for some weeks on the construction of the landing pad. This corresponds with information that RTLS of the Jason 3 booster, while desired, has not been approved.

Thanks, Helodriver. Not surprising that RTLS has not yet been approved for Jason 3.

I know opinions here differ as to what preconditions the VAFB range will set for RTLS, but at the very least they'd surely want to see a successful barge landing off the Cape first. If SpaceX can do it on CRS-7, that would certainly improve their case for Jason 3.

I have to wonder if the last barge landing attempt may actually cause a few more conditions to be placed on the RTLS.  When the Falcon tipped over there was some high flying debris.  Has anyone tried to calculate the travel distance based on the video and overlay that on the Vandenberg landing pad location?

You'd think SpaceX would be allowed to rain debris on their own assets if they are willing to accept that risk.  It's dropping things on other people's property that is the big no-no.  Well, that and personnel safety of course. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 05/05/2015 04:00 pm
No new progress has been made for some weeks on the construction of the landing pad. This corresponds with information that RTLS of the Jason 3 booster, while desired, has not been approved.

Thanks, Helodriver. Not surprising that RTLS has not yet been approved for Jason 3.

I know opinions here differ as to what preconditions the VAFB range will set for RTLS, but at the very least they'd surely want to see a successful barge landing off the Cape first. If SpaceX can do it on CRS-7, that would certainly improve their case for Jason 3.

I have to wonder if the last barge landing attempt may actually cause a few more conditions to be placed on the RTLS.  When the Falcon tipped over there was some high flying debris.  Has anyone tried to calculate the travel distance based on the video and overlay that on the Vandenberg landing pad location?

It seemed to me like it was all "barge scale", so hundreds of feet at worst.

But irrespective of that, since RTLS occurs right after launch, you should consider the initial launch hazard zone, which starts out centered around the launch pad, and then spans a corridor that proceeds in the general direction of the landing pad - for a fully fueled rocket that's at low altitude above ground.

If that keep-out zone is still in effect, I can't see how fragments from a ground-level crash landing can escape outside of it.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 05/05/2015 04:13 pm

If that keep-out zone is still in effect, I can't see how fragments from a ground-level crash landing can escape outside of it.

COPV powered debris which went much further.  VAFB has facilities within a 1000' of the landing pad.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Sesquipedalian on 05/05/2015 05:15 pm

If that keep-out zone is still in effect, I can't see how fragments from a ground-level crash landing can escape outside of it.

COPV powered debris which went much further.  VAFB has facilities within a 1000' of the landing pad.

So you're saying that the keep-out zone is smaller than 1000'?  That doesn't make sense.  Spare a few more words for us, please, to clarify your thoughts.  ("Much further" than what, if not the keep-out zone?)

I'm pretty sure that meekGee is saying that he can't see how a ground-level landing crash would be more severe than a ground-level launch failure, in which case the launch keep-out zone should be sufficient to stand in for a landing keep-out zone as well.

There were COPV projectiles in the Antares failure just as surely as there were in the Falcon crash.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: acsawdey on 05/05/2015 05:30 pm
I'm pretty sure that meekGee is saying that he can't see how a ground-level landing crash would be more severe than a ground-level launch failure, in which case the launch keep-out zone should be sufficient to stand in for a landing keep-out zone as well.

There were COPV projectiles in the Antares failure just as surely as there were in the Falcon crash.

However, the history is that F9 has demonstrated many successful launches and no successful landings. So at present p(landing failure) >> p(launch failure) based on past history.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 05/05/2015 05:41 pm

If that keep-out zone is still in effect, I can't see how fragments from a ground-level crash landing can escape outside of it.

COPV powered debris which went much further.  VAFB has facilities within a 1000' of the landing pad.

So you're saying that the keep-out zone is smaller than 1000'?  That doesn't make sense.  Spare a few more words for us, please, to clarify your thoughts.  ("Much further" than what, if not the keep-out zone?)

I'm pretty sure that meekGee is saying that he can't see how a ground-level landing crash would be more severe than a ground-level launch failure, in which case the launch keep-out zone should be sufficient to stand in for a landing keep-out zone as well.

There were COPV projectiles in the Antares failure just as surely as there were in the Falcon crash.

The titan explosion in 1986 damaged a lot of facilities.   Antares HIF is further away
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: kevinof on 05/05/2015 05:47 pm

If that keep-out zone is still in effect, I can't see how fragments from a ground-level crash landing can escape outside of it.

COPV powered debris which went much further.  VAFB has facilities within a 1000' of the landing pad.

So you're saying that the keep-out zone is smaller than 1000'?  That doesn't make sense.  Spare a few more words for us, please, to clarify your thoughts.  ("Much further" than what, if not the keep-out zone?)

I'm pretty sure that meekGee is saying that he can't see how a ground-level landing crash would be more severe than a ground-level launch failure, in which case the launch keep-out zone should be sufficient to stand in for a landing keep-out zone as well.

There were COPV projectiles in the Antares failure just as surely as there were in the Falcon crash.

The titan explosion in 1986 damaged a lot of facilities.   Antares HIF is further away

Both were fully fueled. A landing stage will have a lot less fuel so smaller kaboom!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 05/05/2015 06:17 pm
Yes, by "barge scale" I meant "several barge length", so order of 1000', really.

The thing is, an ascent explosion is not only much larger, but likely to happen at worst-case altitude, so its hazard zone must be larger.

The probability of landing mishaps is still at this point higher, but it's not like ascent mishaps are so rare.

Landings are just different, and people have to get used to something new.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 05/05/2015 09:36 pm
Some shots from last evening after the sun went behind the marine layer. Cooler air reduced the heat shimmer effect significantly, allowing clearer seeing than the last visit.

Image SC5 shows that the pair of new shipping container based portable cooling units previously located west of the launch mount have been repositioned to the foreground lower deck adjacent to the helium storage trailers.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jim on 05/07/2015 03:51 pm
When I was there last week I should have asked if they are going to remove the antenna next to the landing area.

this like old times Jim?

when was the last time you were at Vandenberg?



2003
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 05/09/2015 09:12 am


Liquid nitrogen has a boiling temperature of 77k. It is used for cooling LOX. So would it be reasonable to assume they cool LOX by 13K to 77k?
Depends. If you pull a vacuum on the nitrogen, you can get down to (at best) 63K. So they can actually go about 14 degrees colder still. But that might be a lot to ask from a full tank of propellant.

Decreasing the saturation pressure/temperature on LN2 really only works for low boil-off conditions.  Extreme energy input as would be expected in a counter-flow heat exchanger (Lox or Kero on one side, LN2 on other)  or even a cooling bath would probably operate at or near atmospheric pressure -- or even slightly elevated pressure depending on the back-pressure created by the GN2 exhaust flow rate.  A HUGE vacuum pump might be able to out-pump the gas generation rate, but the extra few degrees are probably not worth it.

When NASA tested the technology, they pumped the vapour pressure down to 3 PSIA:-

"The continuous LO2 densification production process utilizes two shell and spiral coil heat exchangers in series. Both heat exchangers employ liquid nitrogen (LN2) as the primary coolant on the shell side. The second heat exchanger is a high-efficiency, subatmospheric, LN2 boiling bath operating at 117 °R that cools the inlet LO2 propellant feed stream. A three-stage centrifugal compressor operating at cryogenic inlet conditions maintains the second heat exchanger bath vapor pressure below 3.0 psia. The LO2 propellant densification unit hardware shown in the preceding photograph has a 30-lbm/sec production capability. The system is equipped with a cryogenic LO2 recirculation pump for moving liquid from the propellant tank, into the densifier, and then back to the tank."

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AncientU on 05/09/2015 12:16 pm
At 30 lbm/sec, the three million pounds of fuel in a FH would take how many of these units to cool a full load in the single hour of loading? You could also have them run continuously on the storage tanks to pre-chill the entire load before the vehicle was loaded, which seems to be the only reasonable way to do it.  You would also need to recirc part of the loaded fuel to keep temperatures down for long pad waits.  May be possible, but sounds very power-hungry.

Are the units you describe proof of concept units or actual in-service chillers? How big was that three-stage pump and how many passes through the heat exchanger (or how many units in parallel) were required to achieve 117R (65K)?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 05/10/2015 07:21 am
At 30 lbm/sec, the three million pounds of fuel in a FH would take how many of these units to cool a full load in the single hour of loading? You could also have them run continuously on the storage tanks to pre-chill the entire load before the vehicle was loaded, which seems to be the only reasonable way to do it.  You would also need to recirc part of the loaded fuel to keep temperatures down for long pad waits.  May be possible, but sounds very power-hungry.

Are the units you describe proof of concept units or actual in-service chillers? How big was that three-stage pump and how many passes through the heat exchanger (or how many units in parallel) were required to achieve 117R (65K)?

Martin previously posted a link to the technical paper, but I can't remember which thread it was in. 
"Liquid Oxygen Propellant Densification Unit Ground Tested With a Large-Scale Flight-Weight Tank for the X-33 Reusable Launch Vehicle"
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20050203875.pdf

The link has pictures of the set up.  Not small scale.  It was a steady-state demonstration and performance test series that chilled 20,000 gal. of LOX for a flight-weight, mock-up X-33 tank.  Used 2 heat exchangers in series as well as a recirculating system.  Based on the quoted rate*, it should take an F9v1.1 ~7hrs to fully chill its LOX loads with an identical set up.

F9v1.1 (non-enhanced) volume of LOX: 79,000 gal  (64,000+15,000)
Density of LOX at normal boiling point: ~9 lb/gal
Chiller rate: 30 lbm/sec.

((79,000*9)/30)(1 hr./3600 sec.)= ~6.6 hrs.  But NASA found that they gained 8.9% density by mass.  Accounting for that, gets you to ~7.2 hrs.

*Major caveat: If the rate of 30 lbm/sec. was the flow rate through the densifier then this estimate is going to be totally wrong because it doesn't account for needing to recirculate the LOX multiple times through the chiller to maintain the lower temp in the tank.  If the rate was determined by dividing the measured mass of LOX chilled by the total time it took to chill it to a steady state in the tank, it will be a reasonable estimate.


Conclusion:  They'll either need a bunch of these chillers or they'll have to be pre-chilling the LOX prior to loading.  My guess is the latter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AncientU on 05/10/2015 11:23 am
Thanks for the reference.  Looks like they are getting about double the delta T by sub-atmospheric cooling the LN2.  At this flow rate, only a pre-cool and circulation for maintenance makes sense.  Three times much Lox for FH, plus cooling the kero will require a major (industrial scale) cooling facility which should be obvious in the Vandy pictures. Also, remember that they are looking for much higher launch rates, so they can't wait for weeks to chill a fuel load.

We've seen LN2 tanks, but I've not noticed anything as elaborate as several of those skid-mounted demo units. Half the gain at a fraction of the cost/trouble seems likely IMO, so single pass heat exchangers that operate at atmospheric pressure (LN2 side) and use at fuel load instead of pre-chilling is still my guess.

Note the size of the three-stage compressor compared to the size of the Lox pump... shows the need for HUGE pumps to deal with the boil off back pressure of even 30 lb/sec flow, which was my original point.

Edit: On reflection, it would be easier to lower the storage Lox storage tank pressure to saturation pressure for the desired Lox temperature to maintain or even precool the Lox... but still don't think it makes sense in the keep-it-simple world.

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 05/14/2015 05:42 pm
SLC-4 activities have been continuing ahead of the scheduled July flight of Jason-3, with this weeks most obvious work being the repainting of the strongback.

The western of the two new vertically oriented tanks near the launch deck has also received a coat of white paint.

The T/E itself has been moved, with the launch table returned to its mounts on the pad for the first time since hosting the Inflight Abort Test Booster last month. The wrapped, tape affixed, insulation material that had been placed on the steel structure of the strongback during the IATB testing has been removed.

No visible progress on landing pad construction at SLC-4W has been made for several weeks.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: deruch on 05/14/2015 06:18 pm
The western of the two new vertically oriented tanks near the launch deck has also received a coat of white paint.

Guess: These two tanks are cooling towers for chilling the LOX.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 05/28/2015 06:07 pm
Latest crop of images of SpaceX facilities at Vandenberg.

Landing pad construction still shows little progress.

New horizontal tanks presumably for gaseous nitrogen, being plumbed into pad systems.

Catwalk construction complete over RP-1 tanks.

TEL strongback painting complete, now gleaming white with no added on insulative materials.

Launch holddowns receiving work.

New tower with radome and new AC units installed at SpaceX Launch and Landing control building on Main Base area.

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Mariusuiram on 06/02/2015 05:40 am
Thanks for the photos Helo.

A minor detail, but there does appear to be something different at the landing pad. Those black lines running across the cleared space look like possibly a thin cabling trench (hard to tell with the heat shimmer). They dont show up in your photos from earlier in May.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 06/02/2015 09:29 pm
Thanks for the photos Helo.

A minor detail, but there does appear to be something different at the landing pad. Those black lines running across the cleared space look like possibly a thin cabling trench (hard to tell with the heat shimmer). They dont show up in your photos from earlier in May.

If you zoom in a bit they look like sandbags laid in a line across the center of the pad and around the perimeter.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: CJ on 06/04/2015 12:03 am
Thanks for the photos Helo.

A minor detail, but there does appear to be something different at the landing pad. Those black lines running across the cleared space look like possibly a thin cabling trench (hard to tell with the heat shimmer). They dont show up in your photos from earlier in May.

If you zoom in a bit they look like sandbags laid in a line across the center of the pad and around the perimeter.

IMHO, those are hay rolls. I've seen hay rolls used to combat erosion (which a large level square would be prone to around the edges), and I've also seen them used (only once, so take with a grain of salt) to outline a building pad.

In this case, I think they also serve the absolutely critical purpose of seperating the part of the pad area that's cut from the part that's fill. This is a very important thing to do, because that's where your slab is going to crack unless the site prep is done perfectly (and maybe even then).

Also, a side note on concrete pouring; foundation slabs on fill can be tricky, because no matter how much you compact, there will be settling later (while there will be none on a cut pad). One tactic I've seen used to mitigate this is to prep the fill, compact it, wet it, etc, and take as much time as you can before compacting again, and pouring. I have no clue it the same is true for a landing pad, though my SWAG is that a foundation slab that can take the weight of heavy trucks would be about right for a landing pad.



Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: georgegassaway on 06/04/2015 01:12 am
Any info, or reasonable thoughts, on "contingency" landing pads there?  Seems like there is room , more of a curiousity that there is no indication of work on contingency landing pad areas.

Of course, there are no images of work going on at LC-13 at the Cape  that I know of. So no knowing if they are going to complete the main landing pad first at LC-13, then contingency pads later, or what.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: CJ on 06/22/2015 09:03 pm
Helodriver, thanks for the reports and pics!

I'm trying to figure out where, exactly, the pad is. Based on your photos above, I circled an area on a google earth image to mark the spot I'm guessing is it.
If that's the pad location, I find it a bit odd, due to the need for the landing F9 on many launch azimuths to overfly the Slc4W launch pad, plus the fact there's easier to build on ground a few hundred feet NW (A location that would save the F9 from having to overfly anything).   

There's also a parking or storage area north of the circled area (W of the long white building). This might be loopy thinking on my part, but my inclination would have been to harden that up if need be (to support the weight of the F9 and the heat of the exhaust), put in a couple of deluge cannon like on ASDS (if needed), and use it as both a parking lot (assuming that's what it is) and a landing pad (I highly doubt they'd be wanting to use it as a parking lot during a launch anyway). It looks like a better location regarding overflight concerns, plus at approx 400' X 500', it's larger. 

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: edkyle99 on 06/22/2015 09:22 pm
If that's the pad location, I find it a bit odd, due to the need for the landing F9 on many launch azimuths to overfly the Slc4W launch pad, plus the fact there's easier to build on ground a few hundred feet NW (A location that would save the F9 from having to overfly anything).
SLC 4W has been demolished - at least the above ground portion - so there's no issue with overflight.  My understanding is that the landing pad is at SLC 4W. 

Flight azimuths are to/from the south for near-polar launches. 

 - Ed Kyle
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: CJ on 06/22/2015 10:24 pm
If that's the pad location, I find it a bit odd, due to the need for the landing F9 on many launch azimuths to overfly the Slc4W launch pad, plus the fact there's easier to build on ground a few hundred feet NW (A location that would save the F9 from having to overfly anything).
SLC 4W has been demolished - at least the above ground portion - so there's no issue with overflight.  My understanding is that the landing pad is at SLC 4W. 

Flight azimuths are to/from the south for near-polar launches. 

 - Ed Kyle

Ah! Then the landing pad location makes perfect sense.

On the Jason 3 launch, the target orbital inclination looks to be 66 degrees, so for a southerly launch that'd make the azimuth about 151 degrees (I rounded, so that might be a degree off), which would put the ground track well inland of SLC-6 (and overfly Santa Rosa Island).

I see where I messed up in my earlier post; it pains me to admit, but I somehow confused east with west.   :-[
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 06/23/2015 12:50 am
I would think that SLC8 overflight would be more of a concern, at least for launches to polar inclinations.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 07/09/2015 11:28 pm
After a month back east I have returned to my west coast perch and here are the results, the first evidence of construction activity for the SLC-4W landing pad. Darker stony gravel (or possibly crushed concrete aggregate)  is being brought to the site by the truckload and compacted with rollers over a black polymer cloth substrate.

Prior to this there had only been the former launch pad MST removal and then soil leveling operations, all of which were accomplished under the demolition permit. With the transport in of gravel and rolling and compacting operations construction has officially begun to construct the substructure for the eventual concrete pad. Prior constructed earthen berms have also been leveled, expanding the size of the rectangular prepared surface.

No notable changes were observed at the launch pad in the last month, although the painting of the strongback now appears complete. The French flag has returned to one of the flagpoles of the pad administration building, indicating the JASON launch prep campaign is in full swing. Testing of pad plumbing was occurring, with occasional loud gas pressure releases audible.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: JBF on 07/10/2015 02:40 am
some nasty cracks in lc3 ???

Heh I'm willing to bet that berm is over 50 years old.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AirmanPika on 07/21/2015 01:21 am
Just FYI they have leveled out the aggregate over the last couple weeks. I didn't have my camera with me but on Saturday I noticed some earth movers continuing to actively flatten out the material. I didn't see any significant piles like in the previous photos from the overlook area I was at.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: StuffOfInterest on 07/22/2015 05:06 pm
Were those piles higher than a single dump truck would create?  I'm curious if the piles were just staging or if they were trying to compress some soft soil underneath.  I've seen that on highway projects around here before.  Put a big pile of dirt somewhere for a few months and then remove it later to have a nice compacted bed underneath.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 07/22/2015 07:00 pm


At 30 lbm/sec, the three million pounds of fuel in a FH would take how many of these units to cool a full load in the single hour of loading? You could also have them run continuously on the storage tanks to pre-chill the entire load before the vehicle was loaded, which seems to be the only reasonable way to do it.  You would also need to recirc part of the loaded fuel to keep temperatures down for long pad waits.  May be possible, but sounds very power-hungry.

Are the units you describe proof of concept units or actual in-service chillers? How big was that three-stage pump and how many passes through the heat exchanger (or how many units in parallel) were required to achieve 117R (65K)?

Martin previously posted a link to the technical paper, but I can't remember which thread it was in. 
"Liquid Oxygen Propellant Densification Unit Ground Tested With a Large-Scale Flight-Weight Tank for the X-33 Reusable Launch Vehicle"
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20050203875.pdf

The link has pictures of the set up.  Not small scale.  It was a steady-state demonstration and performance test series that chilled 20,000 gal. of LOX for a flight-weight, mock-up X-33 tank.  Used 2 heat exchangers in series as well as a recirculating system.  Based on the quoted rate*, it should take an F9v1.1 ~7hrs to fully chill its LOX loads with an identical set up.

F9v1.1 (non-enhanced) volume of LOX: 79,000 gal  (64,000+15,000)
Density of LOX at normal boiling point: ~9 lb/gal
Chiller rate: 30 lbm/sec.

((79,000*9)/30)(1 hr./3600 sec.)= ~6.6 hrs.  But NASA found that they gained 8.9% density by mass.  Accounting for that, gets you to ~7.2 hrs.

*Major caveat: If the rate of 30 lbm/sec. was the flow rate through the densifier then this estimate is going to be totally wrong because it doesn't account for needing to recirculate the LOX multiple times through the chiller to maintain the lower temp in the tank.  If the rate was determined by dividing the measured mass of LOX chilled by the total time it took to chill it to a steady state in the tank, it will be a reasonable estimate.


Conclusion:  They'll either need a bunch of these chillers or they'll have to be pre-chilling the LOX prior to loading.  My guess is the latter.

I've not been able to keep up with the forum properly in the last couple of months (this is the first time I've come back to this thread), so really appreciate you catching this and providing the link to the source document.

Plus the calculations, of course!

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 07/22/2015 08:56 pm
The landing pad aggregate is slowly being distributed and compacted. On  21 July the pictured JLG Skytrak 10054 Telehandler/Loader was spreading material and grading with the loader scoop. The multimegapixel composite image shows the current state of affairs in good detail.

For scale sake the orange telehandler's spec sheet says its 21 feet long if someone wants to use its dimensions to calculate the landing pad's apparent area.

The TEL is still in place at the pad and announcements audible over the pad's PA system referenced ongoing helium system pressure tests.

Work appears complete around the RP-1 tanks and the chiller units with yellow safety rails being the most recent parts installed.

New cones and land grading near the concrete path between the pad and the horizontal integration facility seem to indicate a widening of the paved area may be imminent.



Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MP99 on 07/23/2015 07:44 am


Note the size of the three-stage compressor compared to the size of the Lox pump... shows the need for HUGE pumps to deal with the boil off back pressure of even 30 lb/sec flow, which was my original point.

Edit: On reflection, it would be easier to lower the storage Lox storage tank pressure to saturation pressure for the desired Lox temperature to maintain or even precool the Lox... but still don't think it makes sense in the keep-it-simple world.

Hmm, that is an interesting question - if you're going to cool the storage tank, could it simply be done by slowly lowering the vapour pressure in the tank?

Cheers, Martin
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Wonger on 07/25/2015 06:53 pm
I have a launch observation question.

At the recent CRS-7 Wake in NorCal, we began discussing a prior Vandy road trip several other NSFers took but were unable to get a clear view of the launch pad.  That got me to thinking.  On East Coast launches, you always see these photos of people lined up on the beach, watching rockets take flight.  It's an indelible picture forever etched in my mind and someday I'd like to do that but perhaps for an easier (for me) to reach Vandenberg launch.  So if I were able to talk the wife into a SoCal road trip for, say, the Jason 3 launch, is there a good place I (and the rest of the public with no press credentials) could go watch?  Or is that impossible because it's an AFB?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: sghill on 07/27/2015 03:51 pm
I have a launch observation question.

At the recent CRS-7 Wake in NorCal, we began discussing a prior Vandy road trip several other NSFers took but were unable to get a clear view of the launch pad.  That got me to thinking.  On East Coast launches, you always see these photos of people lined up on the beach, watching rockets take flight.  It's an indelible picture forever etched in my mind and someday I'd like to do that but perhaps for an easier (for me) to reach Vandenberg launch.  So if I were able to talk the wife into a SoCal road trip for, say, the Jason 3 launch, is there a good place I (and the rest of the public with no press credentials) could go watch?  Or is that impossible because it's an AFB?

Use your Google-Fu.  It is powerful.

http://www.spacearchive.info/vafbview.htm
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: CJ on 07/27/2015 08:15 pm
I have a launch observation question.

At the recent CRS-7 Wake in NorCal, we began discussing a prior Vandy road trip several other NSFers took but were unable to get a clear view of the launch pad.  That got me to thinking.  On East Coast launches, you always see these photos of people lined up on the beach, watching rockets take flight.  It's an indelible picture forever etched in my mind and someday I'd like to do that but perhaps for an easier (for me) to reach Vandenberg launch.  So if I were able to talk the wife into a SoCal road trip for, say, the Jason 3 launch, is there a good place I (and the rest of the public with no press credentials) could go watch?  Or is that impossible because it's an AFB?

Use your Google-Fu.  It is powerful.

http://www.spacearchive.info/vafbview.htm

That link is good for long-distance viewing. However, IMHO a better source for closer viewing sites is the Vandenberg AFB website itself,

http://www.vandenberg.af.mil/questions/topic.asp?id=745

which has the following;
Where’s the best place to view a launch?
The public viewing site for Vandenberg launches is off of Corral Road near Vandenberg's main gate. To access the area, take Highway 1 to the Santa Maria Gate and proceed on Lompoc Casmalia Road.  At the barriers, turn right onto Corral Road and bear left to the top. The launch countdown net and port-o-lets are set up near the bleachers.


That site is about 10 miles from LC4. I'd also suggest investigating Ocean Avenue, where I *THINK* some of the Cassiopeia launch vids were taken from; it's a lot closer (about 4 miles) to the pad, but you won't see the pad from there (low hills in the way). You'd see the launch only when the F9 cleared the tower and after, not on the pad.  I'd also suggest getting advice from Lompoc locals.

A further useful website (map based) is this one;
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?msa=0&ie=UTF&mid=zN2z-lh2qKIM.k3D6CSt8hzjY
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 07/27/2015 11:42 pm
Complements of Google Earth, various potential viewing spots.

For each, you can get an elevation graph which shows you exactly how you can't see the landing pad.

However, from some of these points you can see *above* the landing pad, which for a landing, is where most of the action is.

On the downside, there appears to be no cell reception at these locations, which is a snag.

----

My current plan is to see if the local bar (assuming the launch is during business hours) will let me cast to one of their big screens.

This is a temporary solution until Nomadd's gets established and licensed.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: ngilmore on 07/28/2015 05:56 pm
Sorry if this is well known and/or frustrating to the ineligible, but if you are military or veteran, the RV family camp on base has a great view of SLC-3 and probably SLC-4 as well from what I can see on Google Maps.

http://www.30fss.com/famcamp.html
which is here, near the end of the runway:
https://goo.gl/maps/UdOpY

My Dad called me a few years ago and said they could see a rocket getting ready to launch from their RV at this campsite. I was out of my mind excited and I called them around 2 am to make them get up and report it to me live. Must have been an Atlas V.

Probably that's sufficient information to identify the date and launch, but too lazy.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 08/01/2015 02:44 pm
Vandenberg's SLC-4W landing pad continues to make slow progress, with additional aggregate spread and compacted, expanding the footprint of the future landing surface. More piles of base material have been delivered by truck to the edge of the site.

Viewing from a site level with the pad shows that the new landing surface has been built up a few feet in relation to the previously existing SLC-4W launch pad surface.

The SLC-4E launch pad has seen little new work over the last few weeks, appearing to be ready for the Jason-3 launch campaign. The only new visible structure is a pipe and manifold assembly running down into the concrete retention pond at the bottom of the flame trench, possibly part of the water spraying system to protect the pad structures during launch.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 08/13/2015 04:50 pm
Not much visible progress in the last week on the landing pad. I believe they are letting the recently added fill on the southern side settle more before adding aggregate prior to paving.

The launch deck has been retracted upward off the pad, showing the underside for the first time since the Abort Test Booster was on the pad four months ago. This area has a good bit of corrosion evident and I suspect it will be painted soon as has the rest of the TEL.

It was a very bright and clear day yesterday, perfect conditions for large high resolution multimegapixel composite images to document the current state of the pad and surroundings.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 08/21/2015 05:09 pm
Another week of slow progress at Vandenberg's SLC-4. The main activity has been the repositioning of the strongback away from the launch stand in what appears to be preparation for corrosion control work and painting the underside of the launch deck as surmised last week.

No apparent work has taken place recently on the landing pad, with the next flight here not until late fall, there is ample time to let the soils and aggregate settle before pouring the concrete surface.

Late in the day cool temperatures brought stable air and reduced heat shimmer allowing for greater picture clarity. The high pressure tanks installed east of the launch deck can be seen to have been painted with "nitrogen" and "helium spin start" labels.

Clear views of the piping installed at the end of the flame trench show it to be outflows of drains from the launch deck Niagara water deluge system and a pump to transfer water out of the flame trench retention pond.

Clearly a program of greater launchpad ground safety for pad workers has been instituted over recent months with the proliferation of numerous new yellow guardrails in every worker accessible area.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/04/2015 06:17 am
Activity remains low at SLC-4 with the TEL still horizontal and retracted from the launch stand while work on the underside of the launch deck continues. New larger reach boom lifts are in place to facilitate painting.

Work on the landing pad has not visibly progressed in over six weeks, with no changes in the gravel or soil surface observed. Earthmoving vehicles that had been on site are now absent.

Lighting was good and heat shimmer not overly strong so I took the opportunity to shoot multimegapixel composite images from new vantage points.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 09/17/2015 10:14 pm
Lots of SLC-4E pad activity today, 17 Sept 2015 with the strongback erected for the first time since the Inflight Abort Test Booster was mounted on the pad in April. Numerous workers were on site, and the strongback was moved through a few degrees of vertical travel during the course of the morning. Clear air and cool temperatures, coupled with the unusual event of a standing but empty TEL, afforded a good opportunity to capture high resolution images of the structure from multiple angles with minimal heat shimmer.

The landing pad project at SLC-4W lies essentially dormant, with no visible work taking place since the west coast ASDS, Marmac 303 arrived in the Port of Los Angeles.

Two multimegapixel composite images capture fine detail of the strongback, providing a definitive study of the structure for future reference.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Jdeshetler on 09/19/2015 05:12 am
A video of HeloDriver's superb multimegapixel composite image.

https://youtu.be/MyQd1Sy3fZs

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 10/03/2015 10:43 pm
All quiet on the western front. 

Strongback is horizontal again, looks like hydraulic fluid servicing on the launch hold downs and the gripper arms

Construction progress on the landing pad still stagnant.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 10/16/2015 10:52 am
After a months long hiatus in construction at the SLC-4W landing pad site, workers and heavy machinery are once again involved with earth moving, leveling, and aggregate spreading.  The surrounding hillside is being carved into on the east and the level area footprint is being further expanded with earthen fill to the south.

On the SLC-4E launch pad, the vertical standing tanks mounted west and south of the launch deck have been removed. When originally installed, I surmised they were temporary structures, due to the lack of any hard mounting foundations and the close proximity the unhardened tanks would have to exhaust during any launch. Its likely these were used for testing the handling of densified propellants, acting as a surrogate for a rocket's tanks.

Portable cooling units, previously stored elsewhere on the pad, have been placed with a flexible insulated duct adjacent to the retracted strongback.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Okie_Steve on 10/16/2015 05:20 pm
Looking closely at 4.jpg there are a pair of power/data? lines down slope from where they are filling, which may put an upper bound on how far they plan to go.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: chalz on 10/18/2015 02:17 am
The vantage point that these photos are taken from I presume is out of bounds on launch day. But is their any opportunity to place an automatic camera that could record during expected launch and landing? Would a security sweep confiscate it or would they leave it be? Even if not how vulnerable to thieves would it be? I wouldn't ask anyone to risk their property but does it sound stupid to anyone?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 11/13/2015 05:08 pm
I've been on the road a lot the last few weeks and not had a look myself, but a friend was out near the SLC-4 pad yesterday and emailed me these photos. It seems like a temporary building is being erected on the site cleared for the SLC-4W landing area. No information at this time to its intended purpose.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: oiorionsbelt on 11/13/2015 06:12 pm
With all the talk of MCT needing a landing pad on Mars and the research done by NASA it seems that materials for the landing pads off Earth could be tested on the Earth bound 1st stage landing pads.

https://www.nasa.gov/content/landing-pads-being-designed-for-extraterrestrial-missions
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cscott on 11/13/2015 11:47 pm
I'd say "announcement" rather than "investor meeting" and (b) "keep tent from blowing away", but otherwise I agree with your guess.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: eriblo on 11/14/2015 01:30 am
[...]
Suggest its for an investor meeting meant to show off LV in distance behind unveiled screen (pipework in front of "tent" structure) for one of Musk's usually flamboyant presentations? "And next year we'll land a booster right where you're sitting ..."
[...]
Not to rain on anyone's announcement, but to me the pipework looks like a typical frame for a door (opening). And regarding the LV in the distance - isn't the pad almost perpendicular to the tent (i.e. to the right in the image)?

What I think most of us want to know: Is the pad a good currently unoccupied spot for the tent or is the tent necessary for construction on the pad? I'm definitely leaning towards the second option which begs the question - Does anyone with relevant experience have a reason for such a structure being needed for what we thought was a simple concrete pad?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: dorkmo on 11/14/2015 04:34 am
perhaps the announcement has to do with chris' super-secret secret?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: dorkmo on 11/14/2015 04:39 am
also, you can see that they have actually already poured (a section of?) the pad under the tent. a square shape so far. perhaps will be expanded out later to a cirlce.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: edkyle99 on 11/14/2015 01:25 pm
Is there any chance this structure approximates the size of the "barge"?

 - Ed Kyle
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cambrianera on 11/14/2015 01:58 pm
A good control of environment is always a good thing when pouring high performance mortars.
In this case, if SpaceX is using refractory castables, control of moisture is very important.
Anyway, this suggest something more than a layer of concrete.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: arachnitect on 11/14/2015 02:33 pm
Temporary hangar for recovered first stages?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: mfck on 11/14/2015 02:41 pm
There's a logo of a contractor on the pickup track in the front, it's too blurred to read, but someone may guess if they've seen it before. Is it just a general construction firm or something more specialized?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Robotbeat on 11/14/2015 05:03 pm
A good control of environment is always a good thing when pouring high performance mortars.
In this case, if SpaceX is using refractory castables, control of moisture is very important.
Anyway, this suggest something more than a layer of concrete.
Actually, that's a VERY good point!

Regular concrete pits and fragments when exposed to direct rocket blast like we've seen with the VTVL landers of NGLLC prize fame. (I think so, at least?) Especially with a very large rocket like F9R. They probably need some special formulation to resist fragmentation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: dorkmo on 11/15/2015 12:38 am
would an epoxy coating protect from fragmentation?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Robotbeat on 11/15/2015 01:51 am
would an epoxy coating protect from fragmentation?
Yeah, like phenolic resin or something.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: acsawdey on 11/15/2015 03:20 am
Yeah, like phenolic resin or something.

You mean maybe they're just going to slap a layer of PICA-X on it?  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cambrianera on 11/15/2015 08:56 am
Refractory castables or Ramming masses as used in the steelmaking industry are mainly based on refractory powders with concrete-like bonding additives.
Use of plastic materials like epoxies or phenolic would result in ablation of the layer and low resistance to compression (specially when hot).
PICA-X (or similar ablation material) has been developed with lightweight as advantage; in this application it is not suited.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: CuddlyRocket on 11/15/2015 09:57 am
[...]
Suggest its for an investor meeting meant to show off LV in distance behind unveiled screen (pipework in front of "tent" structure) for one of Musk's usually flamboyant presentations? "And next year we'll land a booster right where you're sitting ..."
[...]
Not to rain on anyone's announcement, but to me the pipework looks like a typical frame for a door (opening). And regarding the LV in the distance - isn't the pad almost perpendicular to the tent (i.e. to the right in the image)?

Some kind of public/press announcement with a reveal? Musk gives an opening speech and then ta da; the doors open and something trundles out! (The 'doors' could just be curtains or tarpaulin of course.)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: AJW on 11/15/2015 02:20 pm
Looks like it might be a long drive to the SpaceX Holiday Party this year.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 11/15/2015 05:11 pm
The shipping containers with tent roof remind me of the Nomadic Museum designed by Japanese architect Shigeru Ban. I wonder if someone took a bit of inspiration from that.

(http://www.nyc-architecture.com/CHE/PICT0019.JPG)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: rcoppola on 11/15/2015 05:33 pm
When I first saw that temp building I noticed:
-It seemed to be in the middle of the pad.
-Large blocks of concrete had already been poured
-It doesn't seem the right shape to move around as you pour the rest of the pad if your intention was to always have the section of pad your pouring covered.
-High winds coming off the sea makes stabilizing the cover with storage containers a smart idea. (I thought overkill at first)

So all things considered, I wonder, considering the center placement, if the center of the pad is of a different nature then the rest of it and that they'll also use the protection to do something special with the X logo.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 11/15/2015 05:46 pm
Temporary hangar for recovered first stages?

It looks like 3 x 40' containers long, so 120' overall, may be a bit short for a first stage plus interstage.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: JBF on 11/15/2015 07:50 pm
Temporary hangar for recovered first stages?

It looks like 3 x 40' containers long, so 120' overall, may be a bit short for a first stage plus interstage.

how about moving recovery processing of cargo dragons to free up shipping to Texas?
What is going up looks like a temporary structure. If they were doing that it would probably be in a real building.  Besides which why use something you took a lot of effort to level when there a lots of buildings available.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: arachnitect on 11/15/2015 08:17 pm
Temporary hangar for recovered first stages?

It looks like 3 x 40' containers long, so 120' overall, may be a bit short for a first stage plus interstage.

How sure are you that they're 40'?  We have all kinds of terrible 48' and 53' monstrosities in the US (It would still be a tight fit).

I look at that picture, and I see storage/work space for something bulky.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 11/16/2015 12:37 am
If it were anywhere else I'd say it is a overkilled party structure, with the containers being kitchens/lavatories/etc.   If you have such a setup on speed-dial, it's a very quick way to set up a party tent without worrying about foundations and anchoring.

Why in the middle of the pad?  Maybe just a sentimental location..   And maybe the party is already in the past, too, and we're only now finding out...
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 11/16/2015 02:51 pm
If it were anywhere else I'd say it is a overkilled party structure, with the containers being kitchens/lavatories/etc.   If you have such a setup on speed-dial, it's a very quick way to set up a party tent without worrying about foundations and anchoring.

Why in the middle of the pad?  Maybe just a sentimental location..   And maybe the party is already in the past, too, and we're only now finding out...

Helodriver's source seems to think the building is going up, not coming down, so the party probably hasn't happened yet. And an event that big, someone here would have heard about it if it had already happened.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 11/16/2015 03:08 pm
I don't think it is just a party tent. They added the containers for a reason, for height, not as toilets or for catering. If it is for a presentation they have something big to present. This is my opinion.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Senex on 11/16/2015 04:50 pm
. . . and all the shipping containers are the same colour.  For construction purposes matched colours wouldn't have mattered.

. . . and they are all white . . . the correct background for Spacex's logo colours.

All suggesting an "art director" is involved — i.e. a presentation.  (Or a very obsessive concrete contractor . . .)

Furthermore, the extra height would not have been needed just to shelter a concrete or surface treatment.

Something large is going to be sheltered here temporarily.  And I am guessing it will be blue, grey, and white.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Roy_H on 11/16/2015 04:58 pm
I don't think it is a party tent either. I cannot imagine what function it serves.

A coating of any sort would not protect standard concrete from the rocket blast. The reason the concrete fragments is due to thermal expansion of the surface being much higher temperature than the concrete lower down. What they need is a concrete formulation with zero coefficient of expansion.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 11/16/2015 05:04 pm
It looks a lot like this tent type:

http://www.liri-tents.com/en/product/index_314.html

If so, the max clear span width is listed as 25 meters, with 5 meter bay width. At 9 bays long, that's a tent 25 m wide x 45 m long.

Which is just long enough for a stage 1 (without interstage).
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: chrisking0997 on 11/17/2015 05:07 pm
maybe Elon's setting up for a special screening of Star Wars??

seriously, seems odd that they would choose to temporarily house something in the middle of what is essentially a construction zone (an incomplete one at that).  Theres gotta be tons of other places to throw a tent up to house something. 
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 11/17/2015 05:23 pm
They have raised the base of the tent up, using the Containers, and the center opening is almost a square 6.2 m on a side; there are 3 containers, about 37 m long... anyone guess what would fit through that door way (if it is a door way) inside that tent... I don't think it is a presentation tent, but storage... oh, and the front appears to be 18-19 m wide (possibly 20m standard assuming the angle of the photo is making measurements off)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: OnWithTheShow on 11/17/2015 05:31 pm
We know that they have a non-pad storage location for S1's at CCAFS right? Perhaps a similar facility was not available at VBAFB? With the number of Iridium launches coming up perhaps they foresaw a need to be able to store stages.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 11/17/2015 05:35 pm
We know that they have a non-pad storage location for S1's at CCAFS right? Perhaps a similar facility was not available at VBAFB? With the number of Iridium launches coming up perhaps they foresaw a need to be able to store stages.

They need the landing pad for that. This is a very temporary facility, to be vacated probably before the end of this year.

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 11/17/2015 05:56 pm
We know that they have a non-pad storage location for S1's at CCAFS right? Perhaps a similar facility was not available at VBAFB? With the number of Iridium launches coming up perhaps they foresaw a need to be able to store stages.

They need the landing pad for that. This is a very temporary facility, to be vacated probably before the end of this year.

But why raise it up so high, that is not needed for a simple presentation... even a rock concert venue didn't do that... this has to be something more... just can't figure out what...
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 11/17/2015 06:00 pm
this has to be something more... just can't figure out what...

We can agree on that. :)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MrHollifield on 11/17/2015 08:28 pm
Is the Inflight Abort vehicle still at Vandenberg? Could this be temp storage for that stage while processing Jason?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 11/17/2015 09:00 pm
do you notice a heavy lift crane in the center of the tent?

No, I see an elevated platform, maybe for mounting the tarpaulin.

Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 11/18/2015 03:43 pm
The most likely explanation has already been posted, that they are probably pouring some special blend of concrete they hope will stand up better to the blast from landing rockets, which probably needs to cure under as controlled of conditions as possible. Thus, the temporary tent to ward off sunlight and winds, and my guess for the containers is that they actually contained the equipment and materials being used to produce and pour the special concrete blend.

Except that the floor is already in place, but the tent isn't even fully erected yet.

Edit: don't know if the tent floor is concrete or temporary wood frame, but clearly a floor is there.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: whitelancer64 on 11/18/2015 03:52 pm
The most likely explanation has already been posted, that they are probably pouring some special blend of concrete they hope will stand up better to the blast from landing rockets, which probably needs to cure under as controlled of conditions as possible. Thus, the temporary tent to ward off sunlight and winds, and my guess for the containers is that they actually contained the equipment and materials being used to produce and pour the special concrete blend.

Except that the concrete floor seems already to have been poured and evidently cured hard enough to drive the lifts on,  but the tent isn't even fully erected yet.

Perhaps this is a second, more durable layer on top. Or an ablative coating.

It makes more sense than it being a party tent of some kind.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 11/18/2015 03:59 pm
Even the quantum computer idea seems more plausible to me than a cover for concrete pouring. There are much simpler solutions for that.

It's got to be some kind of presentation.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: The Roadie on 11/18/2015 04:01 pm
A little bird tells me it's just to be fabricating stuff in, and my guess after that is that the approaching El Nino exceedingly rainy winter made them want to keep the builders and fixtures protected during that time.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cambrianera on 11/18/2015 04:08 pm
The most likely explanation has already been posted, that they are probably pouring some special blend of concrete they hope will stand up better to the blast from landing rockets, which probably needs to cure under as controlled of conditions as possible. Thus, the temporary tent to ward off sunlight and winds, and my guess for the containers is that they actually contained the equipment and materials being used to produce and pour the special concrete blend.

Except that the floor is already in place, but the tent isn't even fully erected yet.

Edit: don't know if the tent floor is concrete or temporary wood frame, but clearly a floor is there.
You don‘t pour a refractory castable costing 10x standard concrete on unprepared soil.
And you can‘t leave much moisture in a layer that must stand a flow of molten steel at over 1500 C.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: mvpel on 11/18/2015 04:15 pm
EFFECT OF CURING CONDITIONS ON THE PROPERTIES OF ULTRA-LOW CEMENT REFRACTORY CASTABLES (http://www.researchgate.net/publication/265044003_Effect_of_Curing_Conditions_on_the_Properties_of_Ultra-Low_Cement_Refractory_Castables) - Fábio A. Cardoso, Murilo D. M. Innocentini, Mario M. Akiyoshi and Victor C. Pandolfelli; Department of Materials Engineering, UFSCar – Federal University of São Carlos
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: slavvy on 11/18/2015 04:27 pm
What about just asking SpaceX what the tent is for?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: mvpel on 11/18/2015 04:27 pm
Take a look under the containers at the lower right corner - it appears the beams are being used to support the containers at the perimeter of the existing slab, to bring the bottoms of them level to the surface of the slab and avoid placing them on the slab itself.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MikeAtkinson on 11/18/2015 04:33 pm
A little bird tells me it's just to be fabricating stuff in, and my guess after that is that the approaching El Nino exceedingly rainy winter made them want to keep the builders and fixtures protected during that time.

Sounds like a good explanation to me.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: xpete on 11/18/2015 06:42 pm
Somebody from SpaceX said they need a new TEL for FH at Vandenberg and they can't buit it inside the hangar because they are using it for Jason-3.  Maybe thay are going to build the TEL inside that tent. Is that big big enough?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Semmel on 11/18/2015 07:22 pm
Somebody from SpaceX said they need a new TEL for FH at Vandenberg and they can't buit it inside the hangar because they are using it for Jason-3.  Maybe thay are going to build the TEL inside that tent. Is that big big enough?

That sounds very plausible for me. It explains all what we see.
Tentsize: needs to be that large because the TEL is that large
Temperary: they need to construct only one TEL
Containers: they need tools and machines, storing them in the containers
Doing on the landing pad: already prepared concrete floor, no additional work needed. Also the first launch might use the barge anyway so they the landing pad might not be needed for quite some time.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 11/18/2015 07:49 pm
That tent is not nearly big enough for the TEL. However it may be possible that always only the part that is worked on would be inside.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: rcoppola on 11/18/2015 08:08 pm
That tent is not nearly big enough for the TEL. However it may be possible that always only the part that is worked on would be inside.

very surprising if the TEL would need to be rebuilt again.   They just rebuilt the whole pad some months ago with no launches after, as yet.
Considering how long FH has been in development, they probably moved beyond the initial design that the current TEL was designed to accommodate. Judging from what the 39A TEL looks like and the capability (Requirement?)  to go horizontal once the Falcon is released from it's hold downs, I'd say that perhaps they got a little bit ahead of themselves with the previous Vandy TEL upgrades.

It may also be the case that they don't have to redo the whole thing. Just some additions and modifications. Perhaps dramatic ones, perhaps not.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: MikeAtkinson on 11/18/2015 08:10 pm
Maybe it an unerector to get a landed stage horizontal after landing, and transport it back.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 11/19/2015 01:18 am

try this....SX is going after DoD contracts.

They need a service tower for vertical integration of the payload.

Now that one sounds perhaps plausible.

My wife runs a high end event company for big (huge) investment firms. I showed her the tent and she assured me it wasn't for an event. Not because it was too high or too big. But because it was too low end. Therefore I support the "temp shelter for construction" theory, and as has been mentioned, the doors in the containers could indicate excellent storage and shop space. Add the requirement for vertical integration requirement for AF contracts and there may be something there. What's the speculation on the feasibility of west coast GPS launches?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Antilope7724 on 11/19/2015 10:50 am

try this....SX is going after DoD contracts.

They need a service tower for vertical integration of the payload.

Now that one sounds perhaps plausible.

My wife runs a high end event company for big (huge) investment firms. I showed her the tent and she assured me it wasn't for an event. Not because it was too high or too big. But because it was too low end. Therefore I support the "temp shelter for construction" theory, and as has been mentioned, the doors in the containers could indicate excellent storage and shop space. Add the requirement for vertical integration requirement for AF contracts and there may be something there. What's the speculation on the feasibility of west coast GPS launches?

October through April is the rainy season in most of California. May through Sept is usually the dry season (5 or 6 months without even a sprinkle of rain). This year, due to the El Nino (warmer than normal ocean temps off the coast), we are possibly expecting heavier than normal rains. Maybe a weather shelter for construction.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: guckyfan on 11/19/2015 02:32 pm
Whatever this tentstructure is for, we must not forget this is the landing site under construction and it must be gone within app. 2 months. That seems too short for major construction. Why would they chose the landing pad? I am sure there must be other locations in Vandenberg that would be suitable.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: meekGee on 11/19/2015 02:35 pm

try this....SX is going after DoD contracts.

They need a service tower for vertical integration of the payload.

Now that one sounds perhaps plausible.

My wife runs a high end event company for big (huge) investment firms. I showed her the tent and she assured me it wasn't for an event. Not because it was too high or too big. But because it was too low end. Therefore I support the "temp shelter for construction" theory, and as has been mentioned, the doors in the containers could indicate excellent storage and shop space. Add the requirement for vertical integration requirement for AF contracts and there may be something there. What's the speculation on the feasibility of west coast GPS launches?

October through April is the rainy season in most of California. May through Sept is usually the dry season (5 or 6 months without even a sprinkle of rain). This year, due to the El Nino (warmer than normal ocean temps off the coast), we are possibly expecting heavier than normal rains. Maybe a weather shelter for construction.

I'm buying into that, because of the lack of flat ground nearby, and it implies barge only landings in the near future.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 11/19/2015 10:30 pm
Whatever this tentstructure is for, we must not forget this is the landing site under construction and it must be gone within app. 2 months. That seems too short for major construction. Why would they chose the landing pad? I am sure there must be other locations in Vandenberg that would be suitable.

Why 2 months? IIRC, last word we had was that even if Orbcomm barge landing attempt was successful, they would probably attempt a barge landing too at VAFB before attempting RTLS at VAFB. Which puts the earliest VAFB RTLS attempt at the next VAFB mission after Jason-3. Which is what...Iridium? ...NET spring 2016...?
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: the_other_Doug on 11/20/2015 02:55 am
Whatever this tentstructure is for, we must not forget this is the landing site under construction and it must be gone within app. 2 months. That seems too short for major construction. Why would they chose the landing pad? I am sure there must be other locations in Vandenberg that would be suitable.

Why 2 months? IIRC, last word we had was that even if Orbcomm barge landing attempt was successful, they would probably attempt a barge landing too at VAFB before attempting RTLS at VAFB. Which puts the earliest VAFB RTLS attempt at the next VAFB mission after Jason-3. Which is what...Iridium? ...NET spring 2016...?

OK -- so, four to six months, maybe.  At the earliest.

This sure ain't a permanent structure, guys.  Whatever it's for, it's obviously not in the plans for it to be there all that long.  And it likely won't take much more than a few days for a good-sized team of workers to take down.

As such, the quest for the reason(s) for the thing ought to focus on some thing or things that will be happening over no more than the next few months.  Heck, maybe it's just the location for the First Annual SpaceX Wienie Roast!  (And wait 'til you see what they use to roast the wienies... :D )
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: NewSpaceIsFun on 11/20/2015 06:00 am
Somebody from SpaceX said they need a new TEL for FH at Vandenberg and they can't buit it inside the hangar because they are using it for Jason-3.  Maybe thay are going to build the TEL inside that tent. Is that big big enough?

Maybe it an unerector to get a landed stage horizontal after landing, and transport it back.

Maybe a mini TEL (aka unerector) whose only purpose is as Mike indicates. Sufficient to lift/rotate/move landed stage into assembly building for loading onto truck for SPA or McGregor, etc
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: billh on 11/20/2015 05:47 pm
As such, the quest for the reason(s) for the thing ought to focus on some thing or things that will be happening over no more than the next few months.  Heck, maybe it's just the location for the First Annual SpaceX Wienie Roast!  (And wait 'til you see what they use to roast the wienies... :D )
On the wiener roast idea, maybe they can pick up some pointers from the Armadillo Aerospace guys...
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Helodriver on 12/01/2015 06:04 pm
Was out on base yesterday at SLC-4. The tent is complete, covering the central section of the future landing area.

Conversation with pad personnel confirmed its most definitely not for SpaceX's Christmas party. ;)

An info note about this thread:

All future high resolution photo updates about SpaceX Vandenberg activities will be on a new dedicated L2 thread. SpaceX has voiced legitimate concerns to me about potential misuse of prior photos posted here and no further detailed ones will be posted here by me. They also said that my photos, due to their quality, have been used for internal SpaceX purposes too :)

Photo updates on Vandenberg activities will continue, discussions on how they will be shared are underway with SpaceX site management. Going forward this cooperative arrangement should be of benefit to all of us on NSF and the SpaceX'ers busy building the world's first self contained VTOL orbital spaceport. Good times ahead!
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Kabloona on 12/01/2015 07:10 pm
Thanks helodriver for your VAFB photos and reports. Sorry to hear that future posts may be restricted but we can understand SpaceX's concerns with your gigapixel camera.  ;)
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: JamesH on 12/01/2015 07:31 pm
Was out on base yesterday at SLC-4. The tent is complete, covering the central section of the future landing area.

Conversation with pad personnel confirmed its most definitely not for SpaceX's Christmas party. ;)

An info note about this thread:

All future high resolution photo updates about SpaceX Vandenberg activities will be on a new dedicated L2 thread. SpaceX has voiced legitimate concerns to me about potential misuse of prior photos posted here and no further detailed ones will be posted here by me. They also said that my photos, due to their quality, have been used for internal SpaceX purposes too :)

Photo updates on Vandenberg activities will continue, discussions on how they will be shared are underway with SpaceX site management. Going forward this cooperative arrangement should be of benefit to all of us on NSF and the SpaceX'ers busy building the world's first self contained VTOL orbital spaceport. Good times ahead!

Not sure I understand why, if there is a security issue, that L2 still has the photos. After all, the images are only a subscription away for somebody who really wants to see them. Still seems to be an avenue of potential misuse.
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: cro-magnon gramps on 12/01/2015 10:21 pm
Was out on base yesterday at SLC-4. The tent is complete, covering the central section of the future landing area.

Conversation with pad personnel confirmed its most definitely not for SpaceX's Christmas party. ;)

An info note about this thread:

All future high resolution photo updates about SpaceX Vandenberg activities will be on a new dedicated L2 thread. SpaceX has voiced legitimate concerns to me about potential misuse of prior photos posted here and no further detailed ones will be posted here by me. They also said that my photos, due to their quality, have been used for internal SpaceX purposes too :)

Photo updates on Vandenberg activities will continue, discussions on how they will be shared are underway with SpaceX site management. Going forward this cooperative arrangement should be of benefit to all of us on NSF and the SpaceX'ers busy building the world's first self contained VTOL orbital spaceport. Good times ahead!

Thanks for your past service... regards the new L2 thread, would appreciate a link here when that thread is created...

Cheers... Gramps
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: Johnnyhinbos on 12/10/2015 04:03 pm
Wait - so ignoring photographs for the time being, is there anything you can share with regards to the tent's purpose??
Title: Re: SpaceX Vandenberg Updates and Discussion
Post by: CraigLieb on 12/10/2015 08:28 pm
Space for a mock-up of some kind?

Kreminologists.. How about parking a cruise ship nearby to spot large trucks delivering tarp covered objects?